in the drug conspiracy for which plaintiff was prosecuted. See Rev. Stearns II Decl., Ex. A (Doc. Nos. 7-8, 24-25). In addition, the EOUSA withholds the name of a third party who provided information to the government in the course of. the criminal investigation of plaintiff and his co-conspirators. Id., E?. A (Doc. Nos. 20, 22-23). Exemption 7(C) recognizes that the stigma of being associated with any law enforcement investigation affords broad privacy rights to those who are connected in any way with such an investigation unless a significant public interest exists for disclosure. Reporters Comm, for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. at 773-775, 109 S.Ct. 1468; SafeCard Servs., Inc., 926 F.2d at 1205-06; see also Bast v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 665 F.2d 1251, 1254 (D.C.Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). The disclosure of the names of private
holding that exemption 7c protects the privacy interests of all persons mentioned in law enforcement records whether they be investigators suspects witnesses or informants and their names are generally exempt from disclosure holding the governments prior disclosure of requested information could not waive individuals privacy interests under exemption 6 and collecting cases involving exemption 7c holding that in light of the stigma potentially associated with law enforcement investigations exemption 7c affords broad privacy rights to suspects witnesses and investigators holding that there is no need to consider exemption 6 separately if information was compiled for law enforcement purposes because exemption 7c constitutes broader protection so any information falling under exemption 6 is covered by exemption 7c holding that exemption 7c protects the privacy interests of all persons mentioned in law enforcement records whether they be investigators suspects witnesses or informants and their names are generally exempt from disclosure  