Whether the court of Appeals may summarily dismiss a Petitioner's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) claim on the ground that 'any issues which could be raised are insubstantial and that further briefing would not be helpful' rather than dismissing the action based on a Statutory FOIA's exemption or for failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies

Petitioner Anthony Roland, proceeding Pro se, filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) under 5 U.S.C. § 552 (a)(4)(B), claiming that 2 (two) of the Department of Justice (DOJ) components (FBI) Federal Bureau of Investigation, CRM (Criminal Division) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) agency failed to conduct an adequate search for Plaintiff records involving electronic surveillance and communication interference. The FOIA was enacted in 1966 to prevent the government from hiding information simply because it is inconvenient, embarrassing, or politically sensitive. A government that hides information without lawful cause undermines accountability, public trust, and informed citizenship. — CONGRESS.GOV The Question Presented is: Whether the court of Appeals may summarily dismiss a Petitioner ’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) claim on the ground that “any issues which could be raised are insubstantial and that further briefing would not be helpful"' rather than dismissing the action based on a Statutory FOIA ’s exemption or for failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies.