Unfortunately the government makes the rules ad there could be nothing there yet it still makes claim
It beggars belief for me that the government would redact âno recordâ.
It depends on the information even if it says âno recordâ such reports are excluded by law under for example 31 USC 5319. FOIA request will explain what statute is cited as mine did.
When you say âsuch reportsâ what do you mean exactly? I believe the poster received his BI back and saw a string of âno recordâ results and then a few redacted with the FOIA exclusion citation (yes, with a reference to the statute you linked to). Whatâs different about the ones that were redacted? If they are really just more ânope, nothing foundâ negative results, identical to many others conveyed unredacted, why redact those?
Thatâs not how the FOIA is laid out. But since you arenât the poster why do you care so much? Thereâs nothing to argue about. Itâs how the government has decided to conduct business
Because I donât think anyone has given him a real answer to his question.
noobnoob
I recently encountered the same problem. FBI Name Search (j)(2)(b)(7)(e) per fbi showing up with everything else in place as expected and a favorable outlook.
Did you get any more specific answers on this?
1 Like
Is it possible to request a copy of an investigation that is still in progress to see how far theyve come?
I donât think so. I think it has to be closed.
1 Like
It means they found another name tied to your social security number and DOB during the investigation but determined it was not you that used that name or it was a non critical mistake you forgot a name you used. John Doe, J. Doe, John J. Doe, JJ DoeâŚetc. they redact it because the report is only about you and the additional name could be due to a mistake at a doctorâs office or something. No worries.