With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in that case. As to the searches conducted to locate item 3 records from years other than 1971 to 1975, the Court does not have sufficient information to evaluate the parties’ arguments. To be granted summary judgment, an agency must demonstrate that its search was “reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents.” Stein-berg, 23 F.3d at 551 (quoting Weisberg, 745 F.2d at 1485) (internal quotation marks omitted). The affidavits or declarations submitted to meet this burden must “explain in reasonable detail the scope and method of the agency’s search.” Defenders of Wildlife v. U.S. Border Patrol, 623 F.Supp.2d 83, 91 (D.D.C.2009) (citing Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 185 F.Supp.2d 54, 63 (D.D.C.2002)); see also Morley v. CIA, 508 F.3d 1108, 1121 (D.C.Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); Steinberg, 23 F.3d at 551-52 (finding a

A: holding that although search of passenger compartment was legal search of trunk was not
B: holding that the cias de scription of a search was inadequate where the declaration provided no information about the search strategies of the components charged with responding to plaintiffjs foia request and did not provide any indication of what each directorates search specifically yielded
C: holding that while search incident to arrest could not justify search in that case probable cause plus exigency justified search
D: holding that acquiescence to a strip and body cavity search did not extend the scope of defendants consent to search his person because of the highly intrusive nature of the search
B.