Alston v. County of Sacramento Sheriff's Department et al

Filing 33

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 8/29/2017 GRANTING 32 Request to Seal. Defendants' 31 Confidential Settlement Conference Statement is SEALED. (Donati, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ERIC ALSTON,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

No. 2:13-cv-1488 KJM DB P
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO,
SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT, SHERIFF SCOTT
JONES, SACRAMENTO COUNTY RIO
CONSUMNES CORRECTIONAL
CENTER DIVISION COMMANDER
CAPTAIN MILO FITCH, PATIENT
GRIEVANCE COORDINATOR
CORRECTIONAL HEALTH SERVICES
KATHRYN GONZALES LVN, LT.
DOUGLAS, SGT. STEED, SGT.
HARRISON, SGT. BACOCH, DEPUTY
OUTMAN, DEPUTY MROZINSKI,
DEPUTY TRIPLETT, DEPUTY
GANDHI, DEPUTY GRGICH, DEPUTY
CARAMELLO, DEPUTY RALSTON, et
al.,
Defendants.

24
25

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights

26

action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 21, 2017, defendants mistakenly filed their

27

confidential settlement conference statement on the public docket. (ECF No. 31.) On August 25,

28

2017, defendants filed a request to seal that filing.
1

1

In evaluating requests to seal, the court starts “‘with a strong presumption in favor of

2

access to court records.’” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th

3

Cir. 2016) (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir.

4

2003)). “The presumption of access is ‘based on the need for federal courts, although

5

independent – indeed, particularly because they are independent – to have a measure of

6

accountability and for the public to have confidence in the administration of justice.’” Id.

7

(quoting United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1048 (2d Cir. 1995)). A request to seal material

8

must normally meet the high threshold of showing that “compelling reasons” support secrecy. Id.

9

(citing Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)).

10

However, where the material is, at most, “tangentially related to the merits of a case,” the request

11

to seal may be granted on a showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097-1101.

12

Here, the material at issue is at most tangentially related to the merits of this case, as the

13

document relates to defendants’ settlement position. Moreover, given defendants’ error, the

14

undersigned finds good cause to grant defendants’ request to seal.

15

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

16

1. Defendants’ August 25, 2017 request to seal (ECF No. 32) is granted; and

17

2. The Clerk of the Court shall file defendants’ confidential settlement conference

18

statement (ECF No. 31) under seal.

19

Dated: August 29, 2017

20
21
22
23
24
25

DLB:6
DB/orders/orders.prisoner.civilrights/alston1488.seal.grt.ord

26
27
28
2