Henry Lavado, Jr., Appellant, v. Department of Transportation, 946 F.2d 1565 (D.C. Cir. 1991)Annotate this Case
Before SILBERMAN, BUCKLEY and STEPHEN F. WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
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.