Opinion ID: 8312552
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: 263A Perfected Request

Text: The IRS's FOIA regulations require that, [i]n the case of records containing information ... the disclosure of which is limited by statute-such as the IRC's confidentiality provision-the person making requests shall establish their identity and right to access to such records. 26 C.F.R. § 601.702 (c)(5)(iii)(A). Where the requester seeks records pertaining to other persons, the requester must establish its right to access those records by furnish[ing] a properly executed ... tax information authorization. 26 C.F.R. § 601.702 (c)(5)(iii)(C). The IRS claims that MEF failed to provide this authorization, which rendered its request imperfect and failed to trigger the IRS's FOIA obligation. Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss at 7. However, an agency responding to a FOIA request has an obligation under the law of this circuit 'to construe a FOIA request liberally.'  LaCedra v. Exec. Office for U.S. Attorneys , 317 F.3d 345 , 348 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (quoting Nation Magazine v. U.S. Customs Serv. , 71 F.3d 885 , 890 (D.C. Cir. 1995) ). The responding agency also must conduct a search that is 'reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents.'  Pinson v. U.S. Dep't of Justice , 69 F.Supp.3d 125 , 133 (D.D.C. 2014) (quoting Hodge v. FBI , 703 F.3d 575 , 579 (D.C. Cir. 2013) ). Even if the IRS was justified in rejecting MEF's initial FOIA request as imperfect, MEF's response (whether it constituted an appeal or a renewed request) clarified that the request was for any information not protected by statute. See Freedom of Information Act Appeal [ECF No. 8-4] at 2 n.1, 6. A liberal interpretation of MEF's request indicates that MEF was seeking only non-return information and that no third-party authorization was therefore required. To prove successfully that a request on its face solely seeks ... return information, an agency must  'make an appropriate showing that all the information ... comes within the statutory definition' of return information. Hull v. IRS , 656 F.3d 1174 , 1192, 1195 (10th Cir. 2011) (emphasis added) (quoting Church of Scientology of Cal. v. IRS , 792 F.2d 146 , 151 (D.C. Cir. 1986) ). In Hull , the court granted the IRS's motion for summary judgment based on affidavits of three IRS agents who had reviewed Plaintiffs' FOIA request and had provided a logical and specific explanation of why all of what Plaintiffs seek was protected. Id. at 1175-77, 1191. However, in Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press v. Federal Bureau of Investigation , 877 F.3d 399 , 404 (D.C. Cir. 2017), the court found the FBI's affidavits insufficient to support its motion for summary judgment because they were utterly silent as to which files ... were examined in connection with the targeted searches and how any such searches were conducted. Similarly, the IRS in the present case submitted a single affidavit to support its claim that MEF's request seeks return information. See Decl. of Han Huang. This affidavit is based only on an examination of MEF's request and the IRS's initial response. Id. ¶ 10. Without a more detailed explanation of the IRS's process in determining that all information responsive to MEF's request would be protected information, this affidavit is insufficient to support the IRS's motion. See Reporters Comm. , 877 F.3d at 404 ; see also Am. Ctr. for Law and Justice v. U.S. Dep't of Justice , 289 F.Supp.3d 81 , 86 (D.D.C. 2018) (on motion for summary judgment in FOIA case, court can accept agency's affidavits if they provide reasonably specific detail concerning the methods used in agency's process). This is all the  more true because the IRS seeks not to withhold information on a summary judgment motion after a search, but rather to dismiss MEF's claim without conducting a search in the first place. It is difficult to take the IRS at its word that all information responsive to MEF's request would fall within the return information exception when the IRS has not run a search to see if that is, indeed, the case. 3 The IRS also asserts that MEF's request was imperfect because it did not reasonably describe the records sought. 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(3)(A) ; Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss at 10. Although the IRS's FOIA regulations require no specific formula ... the requirement shall generally be satisfied if the requester gives the name, ... subject matter, location, and years at issue, of the requested records. 26 C.F.R. § 601.702 (c)(5)(i). The IRS claims that MEF's request was not reasonably specific because it did not include Islamic Relief USA's taxpayer identification number or location, or the system of records to be searched. Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss at 11. However, MEF's request included the name of the group, subject matter, IRS office where responsive files would be found, date range, and the types of records sought. Compl. ¶ 2; FOIA Request [ECF No. 8-2] at 1-2, 2 n.2. IRS regulations require that FOIA requests describe the records in reasonably sufficient detail to enable ... employees who are familiar with the subject matter of the request to locate the records without placing an unreasonable burden upon the IRS. 26 C.F.R. § 601.702 (c)(5)(i). The linchpin inquiry is whether 'the agency is able to determine precisely what records are being requested.'  Dale v. IRS , 238 F.Supp.2d 99 , 104 (D.D.C. 2002) (citation omitted). Here, the IRS never requested additional information beyond the authorization form, and its immediate identification of all of the information ... requested as return information indicates that the request sufficiently identified the records MEF sought. Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss at 7.