American Small Business League v. United States Office of Management and Budget

Background

American Small Business League (ASBL) brought a claim under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from the United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB). ASBL requested “[a]ny and all documents indicating or containing the total federal acquisition budget” for fiscal years 2017, 2018, and 2019.

OMB responded that there was no separate total federal acquisition budget for those years and that it had no responsive records. OMB directed ASBL to publicly available information, including object-class analyses in the President’s Budget, USAspending.gov, the Federal Procurement Data System, Small Business Administration scorecards, and agency budget-execution reports. After ASBL filed suit, OMB conducted an electronic search of employees’ emails and work folders using the term “Federal Acquisition Budget.” The search identified 13 potentially responsive records, but OMB determined that none responded to the request.

The parties’ positions

OMB moved for summary judgment, arguing that it had complied with FOIA because it conducted an adequate search and did not possess documents showing the requested total federal acquisition budget. ASBL also moved for summary judgment, arguing that OMB’s search was inadequate and asking the court to order another search and disclosure of responsive records.

ASBL argued that OMB interpreted the request too narrowly. During the parties’ communications and litigation, ASBL offered several descriptions of what it wanted, including the total value of prime contract awards and information about federal spending on goods and services. OMB argued that these later descriptions improperly expanded the original request, which sought budget information rather than actual spending information.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that FOIA requires an agency to conduct a search reasonably calculated to find all relevant documents. An agency may establish that its search was adequate through detailed, nonconclusory declarations made in good faith. A requester is entitled to a reasonable search, not a perfect one.

The court found that OMB’s declarations described a reasonable search. OMB first consulted experienced employees in its Office of Federal Procurement Policy and Budget Review Division. Those employees concluded that OMB did not collect, track, or maintain data showing a total federal acquisition budget. OMB later conducted an electronic search covering the relevant period and all OMB employees’ email communications and work folders.

The court also held that ASBL could not expand the scope of its original request during the litigation. The original request unambiguously sought a total acquisition budget, not actual spending information or general information about spending on goods and services. The court rejected ASBL’s argument that OMB had to search other agencies’ databases or obtain records from other agencies because ASBL had not shown that OMB created, obtained, or controlled the requested data.

The court concluded that ASBL had not overcome the presumption of good faith given to OMB’s declarations. OMB’s declarations established that its search was reasonably calculated to uncover relevant documents and that OMB did not maintain records reflecting the total federal acquisition budget.

Disposition

The court granted OMB’s motion for summary judgment and denied ASBL’s motion for summary judgment. It ordered the Clerk to enter judgment for OMB and close the file.