purposes” inquiry. Plaintiffs offer two rejoinders. First, they contend that the NIST Study is not “compiled for a law enforcement purpose” because “[i]t is not connected to an investigation.” Pis.’ Mot. at 4. That argument misconstrues the law. The Court of Appeals consistently has held that records do not have to be linked to a specific investigation to be properly withheld under Exemption 7(E). For instance, in Tax Analysts v. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the court held that IRS materials related to law enforcement activities “outside of the context of a specific investigation” met the threshold for materials “compiled for law enforcement purposes” under Exemption 7(E). See 294 F.3d 71, 73, 78-79 (D.C. Cir. 2002). In so holding, it observed that 2, 146-48 (D.D.C. 2012) (<HOLDING>); Miller v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 872
holding that requests for metadata and database schema of law enforcement information databases qualify for exemption under 7e holding that records concerning polygraph examination procedures and other law enforcement techniques are protected from disclosure under  exemption 7e holding that numerical codes used to identify information and individuals as well as codes related to procedures concerning the use of law enforcement resources and databases  and case program and access codes were properly withheld under exemption 7e holding that user access codes that facilitated access to a law enforcement database were properly redacted under exemption 7e holding that computer transaction and function codes that reveal how to navigate and retrieve information from a law enforcement database were properly withheld under exemption 7e