legal doctrine.” Id. We also recognized that “there could be circumstances where, through pure mistake, the Government attorneys had not invoked the correct exemption in the district court.” Id. In this latter situation, we stated that [i]f the value of the material which otherwise would be subject to disclosure were obviously high, e.g., confidential information compromising the nation’s foreign relations or national security, and it appeared highly likely was intended to be protected by one of the nine enumerated exemptions, then under 28 U.S.C. § 2106, the appellate court would have discretion to “remand the cause and ... require such further proceedings to be had as may be just under the circumstances.” Id.; accord Ryan v. Dep’t of Justice, 617 F.2d 781, 792 (D.C.Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>); Wash. Post v. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs.,
recognizing exception recognizing lujanarmendariz as the exception to the general rule recognizing a discretionary function exception to that waiver recognizing general rule recognizing exception to general waiver rule where sensitive personal private information might be revealed