UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
October 6, 2009
MICHAEL C. ANTONELLI, PLAINTIFF,
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Colleen Kollar-kotelly United States District Judge
In what remains of this Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") case, the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") has supplemented the record with evidence that further explains its justification for withholding certain records in their entirety.*fn1 See Order of June 9, 2009 [Dkt. No. 75] and accompanying Memorandum Opinion ("Mem. Op.") [Dkt. No. 76] at 6-8. Pending before the Court is BOP's renewed motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, for an in camera review of the documents at issue. Plaintiff, who is no stranger to litigating FOIA actions in this Court, has not opposed the motion despite the Court's advisements.*fn2 The Court therefore treats BOP's renewed motion for summary judgment as conceded. See In re Miller, 2004 WL 963819, 1 (D.C. Cir., May 4, 2004) (In managing its docket under the circumstances presented, "the court may choose to . . . resolve the motion for summary judgment on the merits without an opposition . . . or  treat summary judgment as conceded."); FDIC v. Bender, 127 F.3d 58, 67 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (finding no abuse of discretion in Court's enforcement of local rule by "treat[ing] the FDIC's motion for summary judgment as conceded").
Notwithstanding the foregoing disposition, the Court must determine whether BOP properly withheld records in their entirety. See Mem. Op. at 7-8 (citing Trans-Pacific Policing Agreement v. United States Customs Service, 177 F.3d 1022, 1027-28 (D.C. Cir. 1999)). Of the 12 previously withheld records, BOP has now determined that two--a one-page staff memorandum dated June 16, 2005, and a one-page drawing--can be released; the latter in its entirety and the former in part. Second Supplemental Declaration of Karen Summers in Response to the Court's Memorandum Opinion of June 9, 2009 [Dkt. No. 78-3] at 2, nn.1, 2. Based on Summers's descriptions of the remaining 10 records withheld in full, her correlation of the information they contain with each claimed exemption, id. ¶¶ 14-21; 25-28, and her sworn statement that following review of the information "for segreability[,] [i]t was determined that . . . no [additional] meaningful portions could reasonably be released," id ¶ 31, the Court is satisfied that BOP has now released all reasonably segregable responsive records.
Finding no genuine issue of material fact remaining as to BOP's satisfaction of its disclosure obligations under the FOIA, the Court concludes that BOP is now entitled to judgment as a matter of law. A separate final Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.