sec pornography freedom of information act appeal
TRANSCRIPT
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 1/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMA TION A C T APPEAL
Before The
UNITED STATESSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
IN RE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST NO. 11-02077-FOIA
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
BY STEESE, EVANS & FRANKEL, P.C.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. $ 552(a)(6) and 17 C.F.R. $$ 200,80(d)(5) & (6), STEESE, EvwNS
& FRANKEL, P.C. ("SE&F"), hereby appeals the denial of its December 7, 2010 Freedoxn of
Information Act ("FOIA") request. If the SEC maintains its refusal to pxoduce in full the
requested information, SE&F ivill bring suit pursuant to 5 U.S.C. $ 552(a)(4)(B) and 17
C.F.R. $ 200.80(d)(5)(vi) for the reasons set forth belo~.
BACKGROUND
On December 7, 2010, SE&F served its FOIA request (the "FOIA request") on the
SEC via email, facsimile and United States mail, (A copy of the FOIA request is attached
hereto as Exhibit 1). The SEC responded by letter dated January 12, 2011, stating that it
needed additional time to consider the FOIA request. (A copy of the SEC's January 12,
2011 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 2). SE&F responded by email dated January 17,
2011, in ~vhich SE&F stated that the SEC cextainly at least had in i ts possession the
information responsive to the f irst two ca tegories of the FOIA req uest, and requested
immediate production of that information; SE&F agreed to provide the SEC more time to
FOIA 4 2 A.ppeal.docx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 2/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
gather documents responsive to the third category. (A copy of SE&F's January 17, 2011
email is attached hereto as Exhibit 3.) By let tei dated January 20, 2011 — three days after
SE&F's email (leading one to question the sincerity of the SEC's January 12, 2011 letter)
the SEC denied the first two categories of the FOIA request, invoking Exemptions 6 and
7(C), 5 U.S.C. $$ 552(b)(6) & (7)(C) and 17 C,F.R. )$ 200,80(b)(6) & (7)(iii); the SEC also
claims it has no documents responsive to the thi rd category' (a copy of the SEC's January
20, 2011 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 4).
The following sentence in the SEC's January 20, 2011 letter indicates that the SEC
did not carefully consider the FOIA request, and demonstrates that the SEC's response
borders if no t cr osses the li ne of d i singenuous: "F u r th er, public ide ntification of
Commission staff could conceivable subject them to harassment and annoyance in the
conduct of thei r of fi cial duties and in their private lives." E ven a cu rsory read of the
December 7, 2010 FOIA request reveals that SE&F does not seek the identification of
Commission staff — publicly or otherwise. I n fact, the fi rst category of the FOIA re quest
seeks the identity of contractors,while the second category of the FOIA request merely
requests the SEC offices at which the conduct in question occurred.
ARGUMENT
Policy Behind And Purp ose Of The Freedom Of Information Act .
One of the seminal cases in this area is United Stntes Department of justice v. Reporters
Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S, 749 (1989). As the Supreme Court noted, the
' Interestingly, while the SEC disclaims having documents responsive to the third category
(which quite frankly defies logic), the SEC does not deny that it knows the information. In
its FOIA request, SE&F requests this information (not just documents).
FOIA ¹ 2 Appeal.docx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 3/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMA TION A CT APPEAL
"general philosophy" behind the FOIA is "full agency disclosure," Id . at 754. The FOIA
"was designed to create a broad right of access to 'official information,' " id , at 772, and
"focuses on the citizens' right to be informed about 'what their government is up to.' " Id , at
773 (citations omitted). " '[ T]he basic purpose of the [FOIA is] to open agency action to the
light of pub li c scrutiny.' " Id, at 7 74 ( ci tation omit ted). F o r t h is re ason, "[o]fficial
information that sheds light on an agency's performance of its statutory duties falls squarely
within that statutory purpose." Id . at 773. Moreover, "the FOIA expressly places the
burden 'on the agency to sustain its action' . . . , " Id .at 755 (footnoteomitted),
II. T he SE C Impr operly Invokes Exemption 6 To Withhold Information.
Exemption 6 allows the SEC to withhold "personnel and medical files and similar
files the disclosure of which would constitute a clears stnuarranted invasion of personal
privacy." 5 U,S.C. $ 552(b)(6) and 17 C.F.R. ( 200.80(b)(6) (emphasis added), The Supreme
Court, quoting from the Senate Report regatding the FOIA , explained: " ' T h e phr ase
"clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" enunciates a policy that will involve a
balancing of i n te rests between the pr otection of a n i n d iv idual'sprivate aguirs f rom
unnecessary public scrutiny, and the preservation of the public's right to governmental
information.' " Department of the Air Force v.Rose,425 U,S, 352, 372 (1976) (emphasis added),
Thus, "thepolicies underlying the Freedom of Information Act[ ] [require the] open[ing of]
public business to public view when no 'clearly unwarranted' invasion of privacy will result."
Id. at 381. See alsoCochran v. United States,770 F.2d 949, 956 (11'" Cir. 1985) (" [T]he basic
purpose of the FOIA i s 't o ensure an in formed citizenry, vital to the functioning of a
democratic society, needed to check against cor ruption and t o h o ld th e gov ernors
FOIA 4 2 Appealdocx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 4/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMA TION A C T APPEAL
accountable to the governed.' " ( c i ta tions omit ted));Washt'ngton Post Co.v. United States
Department of Health and Human Seroices,690 F.2d 252, 259 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (" [I]n FOIA cases
'the presumption in favor of disclosure is at its zenith.' " (citation omitted)); id. at 260 (" [W]e
must keep in mind Congress's 'dominant objective' to provide full disclosure of agency
records." (citations omitted)).
Indeed, it is well established that the FOIA "limited exemptions do not obscure the
basic policy that disclosure, not secrecy, is the dominant objective of the Act , ' T h es e
exemptions are explicitly made exclusive,... and must be narrowly construed.' " Rose,425
U,S. at 361 (citations omitted). See also Washington Post Co.,690 F,2d at 260 (" Moreover,
these exemptions are to be 'narrowly construed.' " (citations omitted)). This is particularly
true with respect to Exemption 6. Id .at 261 (" Exemption 6's requirement that disclosure be
'clearly unwarranted' instructs us to ' til t the balance (of disclosure interests against privacy
interests) in favor of disclosure.' .. . T hus, under Exemption 6, the presumption in favor of
disclosure is as strong as can be found anywhere in the Act." (citations omitted)).
The SEC is wrong to claun that the withheld information pertaining to the identity of
SEC contractors2 who abused and misused public tr ust and taxpayer money constitutes
"personnel and medical files and similar files," or a "pri vate affair" or "a n in vasion of
personal privacy," let alone a "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." Indeed,
the public knows the identity of the government agency whose employees engaged in the
abusive behavior — the SEC; SE&F, on behalf of the pubbc, requests the names of the
'To the extent there is any question, and there legitimately can be none for the FQIA request
is dear beyond peradventure, SE&F does not seek the names of contractor employees whoengaged in the activity in question.
FOIA ¹ 2 Appeal.docx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 5/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
contractors who were paid by the SEC with taxpayer money while their employees were
surfing and view ing porn on th e I nt ernet — instead of do ing the work fo r wh ich th e
contractors were paid.
As for the SEC offices at which the conduct in question occurred, this does not even
xise to the level of a " p r iv acy in terest"; rather, it i s a publ ic request for in fo rmation
pertaining to the extent of the SEC offices implicated in the abuse and niisuse of the public
trust and treasury. The public has a clear right to know how pervasive the conduct in
question was at the SEC.
Furthermore, in balancing the interests here, as must be done, it simply cannot be
said that any invasion of any privacy interest would be clearly unwarranted given the strength
of the public interest at issue — the determinative test, See 1Fashington Post Co.,690 F.2d at
264 ("the public has a singularly strong interest in disclosure" ); National Association of Atomic
Veterans, Inc, v, Director, Defense Nuclear Ageng, 583 F, Supp. 1483, 1488 (D.D.C. 1984)
(" Balancing the coinpeting interests, the Court readily concludes that the singularly strong
interest in disclosure outweighs what appears to be the mere potential for invasion of
privacy."). Indeed, in the context of rejecting the applicability of Exemption 7(C}, the court
in Sullivan v. Veterans Administration, 617 F. Supp. 258 (D.D,C. 1985), noted that the report in
issue regarding the plaintiff's misuse of government property and funds did not delve into
aspects of the plaintiff's personal life. If such an assertion of privacy is insufficient under
Exemption 7(C), it certainly cannot form the basis for avoiding disclosure here under
Exemption 6,
FOIA ¹ 2 Appeal.doc@
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 6/19
FREEDOM OF 1NFORMA T1'ON A C T APPEAL
Moreover, the SEC cannot in good faith contest that information sought in the
FOIA re qu est co nstitutes "t o] fficial in fo rmation th at s he ds li ght on th e ag e ncy's
performance of its statutory duties," Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press,489 U.S. at
773. Particularly in light of developments over the last several years, the SEC's performance
of its statutory mandate has come under increasing scrutiny, The extent (i.e.,the SEC offices
implicated in the scandal) that SEC employees and government contractors misused working
hours and government property is pertinent to that inquiry. In addi tion, contractors are
hired by the SEC (and paid us ing taxpayer money) precisely to assist the SEC in the
"performance of its statutory duties." W i t h th e identityof the con tractors in issue, the
public can seek to d e te rmine, fo r i n stance, whether th ose same contractors were
subsequently employed by the SEC (or other government agencies for that matter) after
evidence of the abuse surfaced.
I I I . The SEC Improperly Invokes Exemption7(C) To Redact And Withhold
Information.
The SEC also has invoked Exemption 7(C), which if applicable would permit the
SEC to withhold "records or information compiled for lan enforument purposes, but only to
the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information , . could
reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." 5 U .S .C,
) 552(b)(7)(C) and 17 C.F.R. $ 200.80(b)(7)(iii) (emphasis added). Exemption 7(C), however,
does not apply here, and even if it did, the production of the documents and information in
response to the FOIA re quest would not amount to an unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy.
FOIA. ¹ 2 A,ppeal.docx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 7/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT APPEAL
As an initial matter, the SEC "has the burden of showing that the records it seeks to
shelter under Exemption 7 were compiled for... [Iaw] enforcement purposes." Stem v,FBI,
737 F.2d 84, 88 (D.C. Cir. 1984). "[A]n agency's general internal monitoring of its own
employees to insure compliance with the agency's statutory mandate and regulations is not
protected from public scrutiny under Exemption 7 Id. at 89. "There can be no
question that an investigation conducted by a federal agency for the purpose of determining
whether to discipline employees for activity which does not constitute a violation of law is
not for ' law en forcement purposes' under Exemption 7." Id. at 9 0. " [A] n a gency's
investigation of its own employees is for 'law enforcement purposes' only if it focuses
'directly on specifically alleged illegal acts, illegal acts of particular identified officials, acts
which could, if proved, result in civil or criminal sanctions." Id . at 89 (citation omitted). The
SEC does not demonstrate that the conduct at issue constituted "illegal acts" within the
meaning of Exemption 7,3 Absent such a demonstration, Exemption 7 does not apply as a
threshold rnatter.
Even if the SEC now were to assert that the conduct of the SEC and contractor
employees in question amounted to "illegal acts" (begging the question of why they have not
been prosecuted), production of the requested information could not reasonably be expected
to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. SEBcF does not seek in the
December 7, 2010 FOIA request the identity of SEC or contractor employees. Rather, it
seeks the identity of each of the SEC offices at which the conduct occurred so that the
s If the SEC now suggests that the conduct of the employees in question amounted to illegal
acts, then why didn't the SEC refer these employees to the Department of Justice (or local
bar disciplinary commissions to the extent that the employees were lawyers, as many of the
SEC employees were)?
FOIA ¹ 2 Appeal.docx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 8/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMA TION A CT APPEAL
public will know just how pervasive the abuse was, and the identity of the contractors (not
contractor employees).
CONCLUSION AND REL IEF R EQU ESTED
WHEREFORE, for th e re asons explained above, the SE C im pr operly in vokes
Exemptions 6 and 7(C) to withhold information from production in response to the FOIA
request. SEBcF respectfully requests the following relief:
The name of each present and former contractor whose employees were
found to have engaged in the activity described in the FOIA request;
The office locations of the present and former SEC employees who engaged
in such conduct; and
The amount of time spent by present and former SEC employees, and present
and former SEC contractors, in such activity.
Dated: January 20, 2011. STEESE V NS FRA NK P.C.EL,
By:
~pn D. EvansPhillip L, Douglass6400 South Fiddlers Green Circle
Suite 1820
Denver, Colorado 80111
Telephone: 720.200.0676
Facsimile: 720.200.0679Email: kdevans s- claw com
dou lass s-claw.com
FOIA ¹ 2 Appeal,docx
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 9/19
EXHIBIT 1
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 10/19
STEESE + EVANS + FRANKEL,PC.
Kevin D. Evans: (720) 200-0613
December 7, 2010
VIA EMAIL (foiapa©sec.goo)FASCIMILE (202. 772.9337) andUNITED STA TES MAILUnited States Securities and Exchange Cornrnission
Attn: Freedom of Information Act Office
100 F Street NE
Mail Stop 2736
Washington, DC 20549
To Whom It May Concern:
Pursuant to 5 U .S .C. ($ 552 et Ieq., I he reby xequest the fol lowing in formation
pertaining to use by present and former employees of the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission ("SEC"), and present and former employees of SEC contractors, ofcornputexs to access or attempt to access, view, or otherwise search pornographic web sites
since January 1, 2005:
• Th e na me of each present and former contxactox whose employees were found to
have engaged in such activity;
• Th e o f6 ce locations of the present and former SEC employees who engaged in such
conduct; and
• The amount of time spent by present and former SEC employees, and present and
former SEC contractors, in such activity,
Should you have any questions regarding this x'equest, please contact me directly.
in rely
Ke in D. Evans
Denver+ Teh 720.200.0676 • lax: 720.200.()679• 6400 South Firltllers r reen Circle ~ Suire 1820 [)enver. Colorarlo 80111
Washington, D.C. • Teh 202.290.6840• Fax: 20 .293.6842 • '1'heArmy anti Navy Club Hutltling + 1627 1 Street, NW., Surte 850 i Washington, DC 20006
r nfoC<'x-claw.som• wsnv.s-claw.r.om
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 11/19
EXHIBIT 2
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 12/19
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONSTATION PLACE
100 F STREET, NEWASHINGTON, DC 20549-2736
Oflice of FOIA Services
J anuary 1 2, 2011
Mr . Kev i n Eva ns
Steese Ev ans F r ank e l PC
6 400 S . F i d d l e r s Gr e e n Ci r c l e Su i t e 1 82 0
Denver , C O 8 0 11 1
Re : F r eedo m o f I n f o r ma ti on Ac t ( FOI A) , 5 U . S . C . 5 552
R eq ue s t No . 1 1 - 0 2 0 7 7 - F OI A
Dear Mr . Ev ans :
Thi s l et t e r r e f e r s t o y o u r r eq u es t , d a t ed De c e m b e r 7 , 2 0 10and r e c e i v e d i n t h i s o f f i c e on De c e m b er 2 0 , 2 0 1 0 , f o r" i n f o r m a t i on p e r t ai n i n g t o u s e b y p r es e nt an d f or m e r SE C
e m pl oy e es o f SEC c o n t r a c t o r s , o f c omp u t e r s t o a c c e s s , o r a t t em p t
t o a c c e s s , v i e w, o r o t h e r wi se se a r ch p o r n o g r a p h i c web s i t e s s i n c e
J anu ar y 1 , 2 0 05 . " Mo r e s pe c i f i c a l l y y ou r eq u e s t :
The name o f each p r esen t and f o r me r con t r ac t o r wh ose
empl oy e es w e r e f o u nd t o h av e en g a g e d i n s u c h a c t i v i t y ;T he o f f i c e l o c a t i on s o f t h e p r e s e n t an d f o r m e r SE Cemployees who en ga ged i n su ch cond uc t ; and
The amount o f t i me spent by p r e sent and f o r me r SE C
empl oy e e s , a n d p r e s e n t an d f o r m e r S E C c o n t r a c t o r s , i n s u c h
act i v i t y .
Under th e Fr ee dom o f I n f o r ma t i on Ac t (5 U.S . C. 5 552
(a) (6) an d 17 C FR 5 20 0 . 80 (d ) (5) — (7) ) t h e C ommi ss io n mu std e te rm i ne w i t h i n 2 0 b u s i n e s s d a y s a f t er t h e r ec e i p t o f t h e r e qu e s t
whet he r t o comp l y wi t h such r eques t and no t i f y t he r eques t o r o f
t he d e c i si o n . Th i s l e t t e r i s t o no t i f y y ou t h a t yo u r r eq u es t i s
b e in g p r oc e s s e d . We w i l l n o t b e ab l e t o c o mp l e t e t h e p r o c e s s i n go f y o u r r e qu e s t wi t h i n t h i s t i me f r a m e d u e t o t h e n e ed t o s ea r c h
f or a nd co l l ec t t h e r e qu est e d r e cor d s f r om f i e l d f a c i l i t i e s or
o the r e s t a b l i sh m en t s t h at a r e s ep ar a t e f r om t h i s o f f i c e .
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 13/19
Mr . Ke v i n Eva ns 1 1-02 07 7 - F OI A
January 1 2, 2 011
Page 2
A s s oo n a s t h e r e s p o n s i v e r e c o r d s a r e r e c e i v e d f r o m t h eapprop r i a t e o f f i ce , I wi l l r ev i ew t h e r e co r d s a nd p r ov i de f u r t h er
r e sp on se t o y o u r r e q u e s t wi t h i n 3 0 wo r k i n g da y s . I f y ou wou l d
l i k e t o mo d i f y y o u r r eq u e st t o e n ab l e u s t o r e sp o n d wi t h i n a
s ho rt e r t i me f r am e, o r i f y o u wo u l d l i k e t o ar r an g e a n
a lt e r n a t i v e t i me f r am e f o x t h e p r o c ess i n g o f y ou r r eq ue st ,p l e a s e c o n t a c t me a s s o o n a s p o s s i b l e .
I n t h e i n t e r i m, i f y ou h av e an y qu e s t i o n s , p l e a se c a l l me
at (20 2) 551 - 720 1, o r con t ac t me a t s i f o r dmC}sec .gov . A t anyt i me y o u m a y r e q u e s t t h e s t a t u s o f y ou r r eq u e st b y c a l l i n g ( 2 02 )
5 5 1- 7 90 0 o r s en d i n g a n e - ma i l t o f o i ap a @ s e c . g o v ,
Sincer e l y ,
N ark P . Si f o r d
FOIA/ Pr i v a c y A ct At t or n ey A dv i s o r
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 14/19
EXHIBIT 3
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 15/19
Kevin D. Evans
From: Kevin D. Evans [kdevans¹elaw.corn]Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 3:02 PMTo: 'Siford, Mark P.'Subject: RE: Request No. 11-02077-FOIA; employees accessing pornographic websites
Xifr. Siford
I am in receipt of your January 12, 2011 letter in response to my December 7, 2010 I'OIA iequest,
I was surprised to read that the SEC believes it needs 30 more days to respond, particularly with
respect to the information requested in the first and second categories of my December. 7 I'Ol.t>.
request, I ask that the Sl."C respond to the first and second categories now; given all that has
transpired, including its various communications in response to Congressional inquiries, the Src
must presently be aware of that infonmation. I f the SI.'C believes it needs additional time to
respond to the third category of my December 7, 2010 I'OIA request, I will ay.ee to a 30-day
extension with respect to that information,
K.evln D, I' vans
STEESE+ EVANS + FRANKEL, VC.
(')400 .'). I'itltilers Green Circle, Suite 1820
Denver, CO 80111
Voice: 72().200.0613
1 ax: 720.20(),0679
Yhts e-m«il message, including any «ttachment(s), contains infnr>nation that may be conftdcntial, protected by the attorney client privilege
or other legal protections, and/or non-public, proprietary information. It you are not an )ntendcd recipient of this message or an«uthorized assistant to the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this n)essage and then delete it from your system.
Use, disscn)in«t)on, distribution, or reproduction ot tlus message and/or any of tts attachments (it any) by unintended recipients is notauthorized and mar be unlawful.
IR,S CIRCU1 YR 2)30 DISCLOSl RL': To ensure compliance with re>luiren)ents itnposed by the IRS, we inform you that any ta)t ach icecontained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot bc used, for the purpose of
(i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction orrnancr addressed herein.
From: Siford, Mark P. mail to:SifordM SEC.GOVSent: Wednesday, january 12, 2011 12:04 PM
To: kdev ns s-claw.comSubject: Request No. 11-02077-FOIA; employees accessing pornographic websites
«Request No, 11-02077-FOIA; employees accessing pornographic websites.pdf»
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 16/19
EXHIBIT 4
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 17/19
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONSTATION PLACE100 F STREET,NE
WASHINGTON, DC 20549-2735
Oflice of FOIA Senrlces
J anuary 2 0, 2011
Mr . Kev i n Eva ns
Steese Ev an s F x an ke l PC6400 S . Fi d d l e r s Gr e e n Ci x c l e Su i t e 18 2 0
Denver , CO 80 1 11
Re : Fxeed om o f I n f o r ma t i on Ac t ( FOI A) , 5 U . S . C . 5 552Reques t No. 11- 020 77 -F OIA
Dear Mr . Ev ans :
T hi s i s a f i n a l r e s p o n s e t o y o u r r eq u e s t , d a t ed D ec e m b er 7 ,
2 010 a nd r e c ei v e d i n t h i s o f f i c e on Dec e m b er 2 0 , 2 0 1 0 , f o r" i n f o r m a t i o n p e r t a i n i n g t o u s e b y p r e se n t an d f o r m e r SE C
e m pl oy e es o f SEC c o nt r a c t o r s , o f c om p u te r s t o a c c e s s , o r at t emp t
t o a c c e s s , v i ew , o r o t h e r wi s e s e a r c h p o r n o g r a p h i c we b s i t e s s i n c e
J anuar y 1 , 2 0 05 . " Mo r e sp e c i f i c a l l y y ou r e qu e s t :
1 . The name o f ea ch p r es en t an d f o r me r con t r ac t o r who se
e mpl oy ee s w e r e f ou n d t o h av e e ng a g e d i n s uc h a c t i v i t y ;2 . Th e o f f i c e l o c a t i o n s o f t h e p r e s e nt a n d f o r m e r SE C
employees who en ga ged i n su ch cond u c t ; and3. The amount o f t i me sp ent by p r esent and f o r me r SEC
empl oy e e s , a nd p r e s e n t a n d f o r m e x S E C c o n t r a c t o r s , i n s u c hact i v i t y .
Wit h r esp ec t t o Nos . 1 and 2 o f you r r eques t , acce ss i s
d eni ed t o t h e r e sp on s i v e i n f o r ma t i on pu r su a n t t o 5 U . S . C .
552 (b) (6) and (7 ) ( C) , 17 CFR 5 2 00 . 80 (b) (6) and (7 ) ( i i i ) . Un derExempt i o n 6 t h e r e l e a se o f t h e i n f o r ma t i on wo u l d c on s t i t u t e a
c l e ar l y un w a r r a n t e d i nv a s i o n o f p e r so n a l p r i v a cy . Un d er
Exempt i o n 7 (C) r e l e a s e o f t h e i n f o r ma t i o n c ou l d r ea s o n a b l y b e
e x pe ct e d t o c on s t i t u t e an u n wa r r an t ed i n v a s i o n o f p e r s on a l
p ri va cy . Fu r t h er , pu bl i c i de nt i f i ca t i on o f Com mi s s i o n st a f fc oul d c o n c e i v a b l y s u b j e c t t h em t o h a r a s s m e nt a n d a nn o y a n c e i nt he c o nd uc t o f t h ei r o f f i c i a l d ut i e s an d i n t h ei r p r i v a t e l i v e s .
Wit h r espec t t o No . 3 o f you r r eques t , we consu l t ed w i t h
t he a p pr o p r i a t e Co m mi s s i o n s t a f f bu t d i d n o t l o ca t e o r i d en t i f y
a ny x es p on s i v e r e c or d s .
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 18/19
Mr . Kev i n Eva ns 1 1-0 20 77 - F OI A
J anuary 2 0 , 201 1
Page 2
I f y o u s t i l l h av e r e a s o n t o b e l i ev e t h a t t h e Com m i s s i o n
main ta i n s t h e t y p e o f i n f o r ma t i on y ou se e k , p l e a s e p r ov i d e u swit h a dd i t i o n al i n f or ma t i o n , wh i ch c ou l d p r om p t an o t h er s e ar c h .
Oth er w i s e , we c o n s i d er t h i s p o r t i on o f y ou r r equ e s t t o b e
c l o s e d .
You have t h e r i gh t t o app ea l ou r dec i s i on t o ou r Gene r a l
Counse l un de r 5 U.S .C. 5 552 (a) (6 ) , 17 C FR 5 200 . 80 (d ) (5 ) and (6 )
Y our a p p e al m u s t b e i n wr i t i n g , c l ea r l y ma r k e d " Fr e e d o m o f
I n fo r ma t i o n A c t Ap p e a l , " an d sh o u l d i d en t i f y t h e r eq ue s t e d
r ec or d s . Th e app e a l m a y i n c l u d e f a c t s an d au t ho r i t i e s y o uconsi de r ap p r o p r i at e .
Send you r ap pea l t o t he Of f i ce o f FOI A Se r v i ces o f t h eSecu ri t i e s an d Ex c h a n g e C o mm is s i o n l oc a t ed a t S t a t i on Pl a c e , 1 00 FSt ree t ME, Ma i l S t op 2736 , W ash in g ton , D . C . 2054 9 , o r de l i ve r i t
t o Room 1120 a t t ha t a ddr es s . A l so , send a cop y t o t he SEC
Of fi c e o f t h e Gen e r a l Cou n s e l , Ma i l St o p 9 6 1 2 , o r d e l i v e r i t t o
Room 1 12 0 a t t h e St a t i on Pl a c e a d dr e s s .
I f yo u have any ques t i on s , p l ea se con t ac t me by ema i l a t
s if o r dm@sec . gov o r by t e l ep hone a t ( 202 ) 551 - 720 1 . I f you
c anno t r ea c h m e p l e a s e c o n t a c t Ms . Ce l i a Wi n t e r b y c a l l i n g ( 2 02 )551 -7900 o r by send i ng an e - ma i l t o f o i apa®sec . go v .
Since r e l y ,
Mark P. Si f o r d
FOIA/ Pr i v a c y A ct A t t o r n ey Adv i so r
8/3/2019 SEC Pornography Freedom of Information Act Appeal
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sec-pornography-freedom-of-information-act-appeal 19/19
FREEDOM OF INFORMA TION A C T APPEAL
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 20'" day of J'anuary, 2011, I caused a true and correct
copy of the foregoing FREEDOM OF INF OR MATION ACT APPEAL BY STEESE,
EVANS & FRAN K EL , P.C . to be served by United States Mail, postage prepaid, on each
of the following:
FOIA Services Securities and Exchange Commission
Securities and Exchange Commission Office of the General Counsel
Station Place, 100 F Street NE, Station Place, 100 F Street NE,
Mail Stop 2736 Mail Stop 9612
Washington, DC 20549 Washington, DC 20549
C ourtney W. M e a r
FOIA P 2 AppeaLdocx