Henry Lavado, Jr., Appellant, v. Department of Transportation, 946 F.2d 1565 (D.C. Cir. 1991)
Annotate this CaseBefore SILBERMAN, BUCKLEY and STEPHEN F. WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance and the opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion be granted. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to justify summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C. Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980). The appellant does not challenge the specificity of the affidavit submitted to the district court, nor does he state why the exemptions cited by the Coast Guard were "improperly applied." See Perry v. Block, 684 F.2d 121, 126 (D.C. Cir. 1982). The withheld information falls within 5 U.S.C. § 552(b) (7) (C) and (D) (1982).
The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 15.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.