Dist.Ct. did not err in finding that defendant could properly invoke Exemption 5 in refusing to provide plaintiff with documents relating to 11 certified immigration cases, where plaintiff requested under Freedom of Information Act all communications between Attorney General, Office of Attorney General and any lawyer in Dept.’s Office of Immigration Litigation or Office of the Solicitor General. Defendant could properly withhold said documents on basis of deliberative process privilege, where: (1) plaintiff conceded that withheld documents contained deliberative communications: and (2) documents at issue pertained to discussions regarding different lines of reasoning that would support particular decisional paths and offered suggestions on draft opinions. Ct. rejected plaintiff’s claim that documents could be disclosed because they also contained ex parte communications, since at time documents were generated, there was no litigation pending in any federal court, and attorneys making statements in documents were not advising or assisting Attorney General adverse to noncitizen.
