Vietnam Veterans of America et al v. Central Intelligence Agency et al

Filing 361


Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 5 6 7 8 VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA; SWORDS TO PLOWSHARES: VETERANS RIGHTS ORGANIZATION; BRUCE PRICE; FRANKLIN D. ROCHELLE; LARRY MEIROW; ERIC P. MUTH; DAVID C. DUFRANE; TIM MICHAEL JOSEPHS; and WILLIAM BLAZINSKI, individually, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL (Docket No. 356) Plaintiffs, 9 10 No. C 09-0037 CW v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY; DAVID H. PETRAEUS, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; LEON E. PANETTA, Secretary of Defense; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; JOHN M. MCHUGH, United States Secretary of the Army; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General of the United States; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; and ERIC K. SHINSEKI, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Defendants. ________________________________/ On February 24, 2012, the Court granted in part and denied in 22 part Plaintiffs’ administrative motion to file under seal certain 23 exhibits that Plaintiffs offered in support of their motion for 24 class certification. 25 Defendants had designated certain exhibits, including Exhibit 65, 26 as confidential and, subsequently, Defendants submitted a 27 declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ motion. 28 In their motion, Plaintiffs stated that In the Order of 1 February 24, 2012, the Court denied Plaintiffs’ request to file 2 Exhibit 65 under seal, noting that Defendants had failed to 3 address Exhibit 65 in their declaration or to provide any reasons 4 to support the sealing thereof. 5 On February 27, 2011, Defendants filed a supplemental 6 declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ motion to seal. 7 Decl., Docket No. 356. 8 Defendants appear to request that the Court reconsider its denial 9 of Plaintiffs’ motion to seal insofar as it pertained to Exhibit United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 See Suppl. In the supplemental declaration, 65. 11 Because the public interest favors filing all court documents 12 in the public record, any party seeking to file a document under 13 seal must demonstrate good cause to do so. 14 Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2010). 15 Pintos v. Pac. Exhibit 65 appears to consist of a “Volunteer’s Participation 16 Agreement” executed by Plaintiff Tim M. Josephs on January 3, 17 1968. 18 Exhibit 65 is sealable because it “contains information about one 19 of the named Plaintiffs in this case that is covered by the 20 Privacy Act,” specifically, his “name and serial number.” 21 Decl. ¶¶ 5-6. 22 individual’s confidential information by government agencies, not 23 by the individual himself. 24 Plaintiffs, who offer this document as an exhibit, do not object 25 to filing this exhibit under seal, Plaintiffs, including Mr. 26 Josephs, do not assert that it contains confidential information 27 or offer good cause in support of filing it under seal. 28 Plaintiffs have already publicly disclosed that Mr. Josephs signed In their supplemental declaration, Defendants state that Suppl. However, the Privacy Act covers disclosure of an See 5 U.S.C. § 552a. 2 While Further, 1 this form. 2 of Civil Procedure 5.2(h) (providing that, even as to certain 3 presumptively private information, a person may waive privacy 4 protections by filing it without redaction and not under seal). 5 See Third Amended Compl. ¶ 196. See also Federal Rule Accordingly, Defendants have not provided good cause to file 6 Exhibit 65 under seal. 7 reconsider its Order of February 24, 2012 (Docket No. 356). 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 The Court DENIES Defendants’ request to IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 2/29/2012 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?