No. 08-5103.United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed On: January 27, 2009.
BEFORE: Henderson, Tatel, and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam
ORDER
Upon consideration of the motion for appointment of counsel; and the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, and the reply; and the motion for summary reversal, the opposition thereto, and the reply; it is
ORDERED that the motion for appointment of counsel be denied. With the exception of defendants appealing or defending in criminal cases, appellants are not entitled to appointment of counsel when they have not demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success on the merits. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted and the motion for summary reversal be denied. The merits of the parties’ positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See TaxpayersWatchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). Based on the declaration submitted by the Drug Enforcement Agency, the district court properly determined the agency had adequately justified its refusal to confirm or deny the existence of records because that information would be protected under Exemption 7(C) of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C). Any responsive records, if they existed, would be law enforcement records. To balance against the privacy interests protected by Exemption 7(C), appellant has failed to “produce evidence that would warrant a belief by a reasonable person that the alleged Government impropriety might have occurred” — which is the standard set by the Supreme Court for evaluating Exemption 7(C) claims.National Archives and Records Admin. v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157, 174
(2004). Appellant’s unsubstantiated assertions of government wrongdoing do not establish a meaningful evidentiary showing that can overcome the presumption of legitimacy accorded to the government’s official conduct.See Oguaju v. U.S., 288 F.3d 448 (D.C.
Page 2
Cir. 2002), vacated, 541 U.S. 970, judgment reinstated, 378 F.3d 1115
(D.C. Cir.), amended, 386 F.3d 273 (D.C. Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of the government.
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed.R.App.P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
Page 1