by the [CIA].” 50 U.S.C. § 403g. The CIA Act, the declarant asserts, “establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld,” DiMaio Decl. ¶ 16 (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3)(B)), and thus absolutely protects information regarding the CIA’s organization, functions, names, official titles, salaries, and numbers of personnel employed, id. “It is well established that these provisions of the [NSA] and the [CIA] Act are ‘precisely the type of statutes comprehended by exemption 3.’ ” Schoenman v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, No. 04-2202, 2009 WL 763065, at *24 (D.D.C. Mar. 19, 2009) (quoting Goland, 607 F.2d at 349) (other citations omitted); see Cent. Intelligence Agency v. Sims, 471 U.S. 159, 167, 105 S.Ct. 1881, 85 L.Ed.2d 173 (1985) (<HOLDING>); Valfells v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 717
recognizing that the declaratory judgment act is only procedural and does not create substantive rights internal quotation marks and citations omitted holding that the statute qualifies as an exemption 3 statute holding act qualifies as exemption statute under exemption 3 recognizing that the nsa qualifies as a withholding statute under exemption 3 because it refers to particular types of matters that are to be withheld internal quotation marks and citations omitted holding that issues not argued specifically and distinctly in a partys opening brief are waived internal quotation marks and citations omitted