Case: Fielding M. McGEHEE, III, Appellant v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Abbreviation: McGehee v. Central Intelligence Agency
Decision Date: 1983-06-24
Docket Number: No. 82-1096
Citation: 229 U.S. App. D.C. 148
Volume: 229
Reporter: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Parties: Fielding M. McGEHEE, III, Appellant v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.
Judges: Before WRIGHT, EDWARDS and BORK, Circuit Judges.
Pages: 148–149

Head Matter:
711 F.2d 1076
Fielding M. McGEHEE, III, Appellant v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.
No. 82-1096.
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
June 24, 1983.
John F. Cordes, Atty., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D.C., with whom Leonard .Schaitman, Atty. U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, D.C., and Stanley S. Harris, U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., were on the petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc, for appellee.
On Petition for Rehearing
Before WRIGHT, EDWARDS and BORK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Opinion for the Court PER CURIAM.
PER CURIAM:
This appeal was decided on January 4, 1983 and reported at 697 F.2d 1095. The CIA has submitted a petition for rehearing, requesting reconsideration of the rulings set forth in Parts III and IV of our opinion, 697 F.2d at 1105-12, 1112-14. We are persuaded by the agency's argument that it has not acted in "bad faith" in processing McGehee's request for documents. Accordingly, we hereby grant the petition for rehearing and vacate Part IV of the opinion. Finding no reason any longer to doubt the credibility of the agency's affidavits, we approve the District Court's determination that the CIA adequately demonstrated that exemptions 1 and 3 of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(1), (3) (1976), entitle it to withhold, in whole or in part, 44 documents responsive to McGehee's claim, and we affirm the court's grant of summary judgment to the agency insofar as it pertains to those documents. All other aspects of our original opinion are reaffirmed.
So ordered.