Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · CFR · Title 28 — Judicial Administration · Part 16 · § 16.104

§ 16.104. Exemption of Office of Special Counsel---Waco System.

422 words·~2 min read·/us/cfr/t28/s§ 16.104·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

(a)The following system of records is exempted from subsections (c)(3) and (4); (d)(1), (2), (3), and (4); (e)(1), (2), (3),
(5)and (8); and
(g)of the Privacy Act pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k): CaseLink Document Database for Office of Special Counsel---Waco, JUSTICE/OSCW-001. These exemptions apply only to the extent that information in a record is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k).
(b)Only that portion of this system which consists of criminal or civil investigatory information is exempted for the reasons set forth from the following subsections:
(1)Subsection (c)(3). To provide the subject of a criminal or civil matter or case under investigation with an accounting of disclosures of records concerning him or her would inform that individual of the existence, nature, or scope of that investigation and thereby seriously impede law enforcement efforts by permitting the record subject and other persons to whom he might disclose the records to avoid criminal penalties and civil remedies.
(2)Subsection (c)(4). This subsection is inapplicable to the extent that an exemption is being claimed for subsection (d).
(3)Subsection (d)(1). Disclosure of investigatory information could interfere with the investigation, reveal the identity of confidential sources, and result in an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of others.
(4)Subsection (d)(2). Amendment of the records would interfere with ongoing criminal law enforcement proceedings and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring criminal investigations to be continuously reinvestigated.
(5)Subsections (d)(3) and (4). These subsections are inapplicable to the extent exemption is claimed from (d)(1) and (2).
(6)Subsections (e)(1) and (5). It is often impossible to determine in advance if investigatory records contained in this system are accurate, relevant, timely and complete; but, in the interests of effective law enforcement, it is necessary to retain this information to aid in establishing patterns of activity and provide leads in criminal investigations.
(7)Subsection (e)(2). To collect information from the subject individual would serve notice that he or she is the subject of criminal investigative or law enforcement activity and thereby present a serious impediment to law enforcement.
(8)Subsection (e)(3). To inform individuals as required by this subsection would reveal the existence of an investigation and compromise law enforcement efforts.
(9)Subsection (e)(8). To serve notice would give persons sufficient warning to evade law enforcement efforts.
(10)Subsection (g). This subsection is inapplicable to the extent that the system is exempt from other specific subsections of the Privacy Act. \[Order No. 208-2000, 65 FR 75160, Dec. 1, 2000\]
Connectionstraces to 1
Traces to 1 document
Citation graph
cites case law
§ 16.104
Exemption of Office of Special Counsel---Waco System.
Cites 1Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.