Epstein Secrets

onably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the government need only show that

of investigatory records while a case is pending would generally interfere with enforcement proceedings. Radcliffe, 536 F. Supp. 2d at 437 (quoting Barney v. I.R.S., 618 F.2d 1268, 1273 (8th Cir.1980)). "Exemption 7(A) . .. is designed to block the disclosure of information that will genuinely harm the governme

onably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the government need only show that

of investigatory records while a case is pending would generally interfere with enforcement proceedings. Radcliffe, 536 F. Supp. 2d at 437 (quoting Barney v. I.R.S., 618 F.2d 1268, 1273 (8th Cir.1980)). "Exemption 7(A) . .. is designed to block the disclosure of information that will genuinely harm the governme

onably foreseeable at the time of the withholding. See, e.g.,Kay v. F.C.C., 976 F. Supp. 23, 37-38 (D.D.C. 1997) (citing N.L.R.B. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.,437 U.S. 214, 220 (1978)). The government's burden to establish the applicability of Exemption 7(A) is not high; the government need only show that

of investigatory records while a case is pending would generally interfere with enforcement proceedings. Radcliffe, 536 F. Supp. 2d at 437 (quoting Barney v. I.R.S., 618 F.2d 1268, 1273 (8th Cir.1980)). "Exemption 7(A) . .. is designed to block the disclosure of information that will genuinely harm the governme