holding that agency’s “transitory possession” of shipping labels, limited to “one-time, attach-and-post use,” did not constitute “control” subjecting the labels to FOIA
How later courts described this case
- holding that agency’s “transitory possession” of shipping labels, limited to “one-time, attach-and-post use,” did not constitute “control” subjecting the labels to FOIA
- “transitory possession of the labels, limited to the one-time, attach- and-post use required by the court order, did not constitute ‘control’ of the labels by the Board[.]”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
SCALIA, Circuit Judge:
Pursuant to the District Court’s May 29, 1981 declaratory order in United States v. Trans World Airlines, No. 81-784 (D.D.C. May 29,1981), intervenor Trans World Airlines (“TWA”) furnished the National Mediation Board (“the Board”) with “peel-off” gummed labels bearing the names and addresses of TWA employees eligible to vote in the then upcoming representation election. While the labels were in the possession of the Board, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“the Union”) filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (1976), for the names and addresses on the labels. The Board denied that request and the Union brought suit in district court, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(4)(B), to. enjoin the withholding. The Union appeals the District Court’s denial of its motion for summary judgment and the simultaneous dismissal of its complaint.
We find that the District Court reasonably interpreted its own May 29,1981 order as envisioning use of the labels for attachment to ballot envelopes to be posted in connection with the election, and as precluding other use. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Mediation Board, No. 81-1648, slip. op. at 15 (D.D.C. July 30,1982), Jt.App. at 471. The District Court then properly concluded that the Board’s transitory possession of the labels, limited to the one-time, attach-and-post use required by the court order, did not constitute “control” of the labels by the Board, and that the labels were therefore not “agency records” subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. See Goland v. CIA, 607 F.2d 339, 347-48 (D.C. Cir.1978).
Affirmed.