With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 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

A: holding that plaintiff failed to plead facts sufficient to allege affirmative misconduct on the part of the government
B: 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
C: recognizing that allegations of government misconduct are easy to allege and hard to disprove 
D: 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
C.