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