Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-00-05454/USCOURTS-caDC-00-05454-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 

---

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the

Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Reports. Users are requested to notify

the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made

before the bound volumes go to press.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

–————

No. 00-5454 September Term, 2004

99cv02195

Filed On: October 21, 2004

CHRISTOPHER S. OGUAJU,

APPELLANT

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

APPELLEE

–————

BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and HENDERSON and

TATEL, Circuit Judges.

O R D E R

Upon consideration of appellant’s petition for rehearing

filed September 30, 2004, it is

ORDERED that the petition be denied. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the opinion filed August 17,

2004 be amended as follows:

In the carryover paragraph from page 2 to page 3, delete

the comma following ‘‘wrongdoing’’ in line 8 and insert a

period; delete the comma following ‘‘124 S.Ct. at 1581’’ and

insert a period and delete the portion of the sentence that

begins with ‘‘which’’ and ends with ‘‘official conduct’’; and

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 1 of 8
2

delete the citations (and accompanying parenthetical) that

begins with ‘‘Id.’’ and ends with ‘‘official duties.’’

Per Curiam

 FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk

 BY:

 Nancy G. Dunn

 Deputy Clerk

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 2 of 8
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the

Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Reports. Users are requested to notify

the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made

before the bound volumes go to press.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Decided August 17, 2004

No. 00-5454

CHRISTOPHER S. OGUAJU,

APPELLANT

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

APPELLEE

On Remand from the United States Supreme Court

Steven H. Goldblatt, appointed by the court, filed the

motion to govern further proceedings for appellant. With

him on the motion was Cary Berkeley Kaye.

W. Mark Nebeker, Assistant United States Attorney, filed

the opposition for appellee. With him on the opposition were

Kenneth L. Wainstein, United States Attorney, and R. Craig

Lawrence, Assistant United States Attorney.

 Bills of costs must be filed within 14 days after entry of judgment.

The court looks with disfavor upon motions to file bills of costs out

of time.

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 3 of 8
2

Before: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and HENDERSON and TATEL,

Circuit Judges.

Opinion for the Court filed by Chief Judge GINSBURG.

GINSBURG, Chief Judge: The Supreme Court granted Oguaju’s petition for a writ of certiorari to this court, vacated the

judgment in Oguaju v. United States, 288 F.3d 448 (D.C. Cir.

2002), and remanded the case for further consideration in

light of National Archives and Records Administration v.

Favish, 541 U.S. , 124 S.Ct. 1570 (2004). Because Oguaju

produced no evidence that ‘‘would warrant a belief by a

reasonable person’’ that the Department of Justice mishandled his Brady request, id. at 1581, 1582, we reinstate our

judgment.

In Favish the Supreme Court held that, in order to outweigh a third party’s privacy interest protected by Exemption

7(C) to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.

§ 552(b)(7)(C), a requester ‘‘must produce evidence that

would warrant a belief by a reasonable person that the

alleged Government impropriety might have occurred.’’ 124

S.Ct. at 1581. ‘‘Only when the FOIA requester has produced

evidence sufficient to satisfy this standard will there exist a

counterweight on the FOIA scale for the court to balance

against the cognizable privacy interests in the requested

records.’’ Id. at 1582.

Upon remand Amicus argues that Oguaju’s assertion of

government misconduct satisfies the evidentiary standard

established in Favish. The Government responds that Oguaju’s mere assertions are not evidence of government impropriety and, therefore, are not sufficient.

The Government clearly has the better of the argument.

In our prior opinion we held the records sought by Oguaju

were exempt from disclosure because Oguaju ‘‘never offered

any reason to believe the Department of Justice mishandled

his Brady request, and under circuit law a bald accusation to

that effect does not persuade.’’ 288 F.3d at 451. To restate

the point in terms used by the Supreme Court, Oguaju offers

only his ‘‘bare suspicion’’ of wrongdoing. Favish, 124 S.Ct. at

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 4 of 8
3

1581. As the Court explained, "[a]llegations of

Government misconduct are ‘easy to allege and hard to

disprove,’ Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 585 (1998), so

courts must insist on a meaningful evidentiary showing.’’

Favish, 124 S.Ct. at 1582.

Oguaju has failed to make the requisite showing. Although

Amicus now contends that Oguaju ‘‘can offer firsthand sworn

testimony’’ to support his allegations, the substance of his

proffer is that the government’s informant committed perjury

at Oguaju’s trial. An assertion of that sort, even in the form

of a sworn affidavit, is too insubstantial to warrant reopening

the record in this case. Such an accusation does not ‘‘warrant

a belief by a reasonable person that alleged Government

impropriety might have occurred.’’ Id. at 1581. The judgment of this court is therefore reinstated.

So Ordered.

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 5 of 8
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the

Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Reports. Users are requested to notify

the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made

before the bound volumes go to press.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Decided August 17, 2004

No. 00-5454

CHRISTOPHER S. OGUAJU,

APPELLANT

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

APPELLEE

On Remand from the United States Supreme Court

Steven H. Goldblatt, appointed by the court, filed the

motion to govern further proceedings for appellant. With

him on the motion was Cary Berkeley Kaye.

W. Mark Nebeker, Assistant United States Attorney, filed

the opposition for appellee. With him on the opposition were

Kenneth L. Wainstein, United States Attorney, and R. Craig

Lawrence, Assistant United States Attorney.

 Bills of costs must be filed within 14 days after entry of judgment.

The court looks with disfavor upon motions to file bills of costs out

of time.

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 6 of 8
2

Before: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and HENDERSON and TATEL,

Circuit Judges.

Opinion for the Court filed by Chief Judge GINSBURG.

GINSBURG, Chief Judge: The Supreme Court granted Oguaju’s petition for a writ of certiorari to this court, vacated the

judgment in Oguaju v. United States, 288 F.3d 448 (D.C. Cir.

2002), and remanded the case for further consideration in

light of National Archives and Records Administration v.

Favish, 541 U.S. , 124 S.Ct. 1570 (2004). Because Oguaju

produced no evidence that ‘‘would warrant a belief by a

reasonable person’’ that the Department of Justice mishandled his Brady request, id. at 1581, 1582, we reinstate our

judgment.

In Favish the Supreme Court held that, in order to outweigh a third party’s privacy interest protected by Exemption

7(C) to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.

§ 552(b)(7)(C), a requester ‘‘must produce evidence that

would warrant a belief by a reasonable person that the

alleged Government impropriety might have occurred.’’ 124

S.Ct. at 1581. ‘‘Only when the FOIA requester has produced

evidence sufficient to satisfy this standard will there exist a

counterweight on the FOIA scale for the court to balance

against the cognizable privacy interests in the requested

records.’’ Id. at 1582.

Upon remand Amicus argues that Oguaju’s assertion of

government misconduct satisfies the evidentiary standard

established in Favish. The Government responds that Oguaju’s mere assertions are not evidence of government impropriety and, therefore, are not sufficient.

The Government clearly has the better of the argument.

In our prior opinion we held the records sought by Oguaju

were exempt from disclosure because Oguaju ‘‘never offered

any reason to believe the Department of Justice mishandled

his Brady request, and under circuit law a bald accusation to

that effect does not persuade.’’ 288 F.3d at 451. To restate

the point in terms used by the Supreme Court, Oguaju offers

only his ‘‘bare suspicion’’ of wrongdoing, Favish, 124 S.Ct. at

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 7 of 8
3

1581, which is not sufficient to overcome ‘‘the presumption of

legitimacy accorded to the Government’s official conduct.’’

Id. (citing Dep’t of State v. Ray, 502 U.S. 164, 178–79 (1991));

see United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996)

(‘‘[I]n the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, courts

presume that [government agents] have properly discharged

their official duties’’). As the Court explained, ‘‘[a]llegations

of Government misconduct are ‘easy to allege and hard to

disprove,’ Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 585 (1998), so

courts must insist on a meaningful evidentiary showing.’’

Favish, 124 S.Ct. at 1582.

Oguaju has failed to make the requisite showing. Although

Amicus now contends that Oguaju ‘‘can offer firsthand sworn

testimony’’ to support his allegations, the substance of his

proffer is that the government’s informant committed perjury

at Oguaju’s trial. An assertion of that sort, even in the form

of a sworn affidavit, is too insubstantial to warrant reopening

the record in this case. Such an accusation does not ‘‘warrant

a belief by a reasonable person that alleged Government

impropriety might have occurred.’’ Id. at 1581. The judgment of this court is therefore reinstated.

So Ordered.

USCA Case #00-5454 Document #675958 Filed: 05/07/2002 Page 8 of 8