Case 1:12-cv-00127-BJR Document 40 Filed 03/04/15 Page 12 of 22 records they are withholding are law enforcement records,” notwithstanding Plaintiff’s “assumptions and suppositions” to the contrary. Id. An agency withholding records pursuant to Exemption 7 must demonstrate, as a threshold matter, that its withheld records were “compiled for law enforcement purposes.” Pratt v. Webster, 673 F.2d 408, 416 (D.C. Cir. 1982). But when an agency “specializes in law enforcement, its decision to invoke [E]xemption 7 is entitled to deference.” Campbell v. DOJ, 164 F.3d 20, 32 (D.C. Cir. 1998). Specifically, the D.C. Circuit has recognized that an agency whose principal mission is criminal law enforcement will more often than not satisfy the Exemption 7 threshold criterion. Thus, a court can accept less exacting proof from such an agency that the purpose underlying disputed documents is law enforcement. This less exacting judicial scrutiny of a criminal law enforcement agency’s purpose in the context of the FOIA Exemption 7 threshold is further bolstered by Congress’ concern that inadvertent disclosure of criminal investigations, information sources, or enforcement techniques might cause serious harm to the legitimate interests of law enforcement agencies. Id. at 418. In line with this more deferential approach, the D.C. Circuit set forth “two critical conditions that must be met for a law enforcement agency to pass the Exemption 7 threshold.” Pratt v. Webster, 673 F.2d at 420. “First, the agency’s investigatory activities that give rise to the documents sought must be related to the enforcement of federal laws or to the maintenance of national security.” Id. To demonstrate this “nexus” requirement, the agency must identify “a particular individual or a particular incident as the object of its investigation and the connection between that individual or incident and a possible security risk or violation of federal law.” Id. The existence of a possible security risk or violation of federal law establishes that an agency acted “within its principal function of law enforcement, rather than merely engaging in a general monitoring of private individuals’ activities.” Id. 12