Case 1:12-cv-00127-BJR Document 40 Filed 03/04/15 Page 4 of 22 affidavits from each of the relevant agencies. See Order (July 29, 2014) (granting Defendant’s motion for leave to file ex parte declarations). At this juncture, Defendants maintain that all of the responsive documents are protected from disclosure by Exemption 7(A), although additional exemptions may also apply. 2 Defs’ Mot. at 1; Defs’ Supp’l at 14. Plaintiff insists that Exemption 7(A) cannot apply because it is “not generally seeking records about individuals who may be the target of criminal investigations, [but rather] it is seeking records about individuals who are exercising their Constitution rights,” by supporting WikiLeaks. Pl.’s Cross-Mot. at 1. Plaintiff has also moved for in camera review of the withheld records. Dkt. No. 17. After this case was transferred to the undersigned, the Court instructed the parties to file supplemental briefing to shed light on any relevant events that had transpired since the filing of the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The Defendants report that on July 2013 Manning was convicted in the military court and his appeal is pending. Defs’ Supp’l at 8. Defendants note that Manning’s prosecution is separate and distinct from the Department of Justice and FBI’s multi-subject investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information published on WikiLeaks, which is “still active and ongoing” and remains in the investigative stage. Defs’ Supp’l Br. at 8. The Court turns now to consider the parties’ specific arguments and the applicable legal standards. III. LEGAL STANDARD FOIA was intended by Congress to make governmental records generally available to any person, on request, unless specifically exempted by the Act itself. Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 2 Defendants also rely on Exemptions 1, 3, 5, 6, 7(C), 7(D), 7(E), and 7(F). The Court, finding that Exemption 7(A) applies, does not discuss whether these alternative exemptions may apply. 4