Kean v. NASA, 1:03-cv-02509

12
requested records, using methods which can be reasonably expected
to produce the information requested.” Oglesby v. U.S. Dep’t of
the Army, 920 F.2d 57, 68 (D.C. Cir.1990).
The burden of proof is on the government to show that its
search was reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant
documents. Steinberg v. DOJ, 23 F.3d 548, 551 (D.C. Cir. 1994).
At the summary judgment stage, the court may rely on “[a]
reasonably detailed affidavit, setting forth the search terms and
the type of search performed, and averring that all files likely
to contain responsive materials (if such records exist) were
searched.” Oglesby, 920 F.2d at 68. A declaration is
inadequate, however, “it fails to describe in any detail what
records were searched, by whom, and through what process.” See
Steinberg, 23 F.3d at 551-52; see also Oglesby, 920 F.2d at 68
(holding that a detailed affidavit is necessary “to allow the
district court to determine if the search was adequate in order
to grant summary judgment”). Thus, if a review of the record
raises material doubt, “particularly in view of well defined
requests and positive indications of overlooked materials,
summary judgment is inappropriate.” Valencia-Lucena, 180 F.3d at
326 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Failure to
conduct an adequate search is “an improper withholding” of
records under FOIA. Maydak v. DOJ, 254 F. Supp. 2d. 23, 44
(D.D.C. 2003).
Case 1:03-cv-02509-EGS Document 45 Filed 03/27/07 Page 12 of 21