privacy interest protected by Exemption 7(C) against an asserted public interest in disclosing information alleged to show that “responsible officials acted negligently or otherwise improperly in performing their duties.” Nat’l Archives & Records Admin. v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157, 124 S.Ct. 1570, 158 L.Ed.2d 319 (2004). “To obtain private information under the Favish-test, the requester must at a minimum ‘produce evidence that would warrant a belief by a reasonable person that the alleged Government impropriety might have occurred.” Blackwell, 646 F.3d at 41 (quoting Favish, 541 U.S. at 174, 124 S.Ct. 1570). Therefore, courts require a meaningful evidentiary showing when a FOlA requester alleges a public interest rooted in government wrongdoing. See Favish, 541 U.S. at 174, 124 S.Ct. 1570 (<HOLDING>). This Court concludes that the plaintiff has
holding that plaintiff failed to plead facts sufficient to allege affirmative misconduct on the part of the government recognizing that allegations of government misconduct are easy to allege and hard to disprove  holding that because the allegations purportedly suppressed by the government were not material an evidentiary hearing further exploring the  allegations themselves and the governments knowledge of the allegations is unnecessary holding that two instances of misconduct do not indicate a persistent and widespread pattern of misconduct that amounts to a city custom or policy of overlooking police misconduct holding that plaintiff failed to establish pretext where plaintiff was terminated after the employer conducted an investigation into a subordinates allegations of misconduct on the part of the plaintiff and believed the allegations to be true even though plaintiff presented evidence in the lawsuit that the allegations may have been false