Estate of Gerardo Cruz-Sanchez et al v. United States of America et al

Filing 134

ORDER Granting 87 Motion to File Documents Under Seal. Signed by Judge Anthony J. Battaglia on 9/17/19. (dlg)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 12 ESTATE OF GERARDO CRUZSANCHEZ, by and through his successorin-interest Paula Garcia Rivera, et al., 13 Plaintiffs, 11 14 15 16 Case No.: 17-cv-00569-AJB-NLS ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SEAL v. (Doc. No. 87) THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. 17 18 19 Pending before the Court is a motion to seal filed by Defendants on September 14, 20 2018. (Doc. No. 87.) Defendants’ motion requests the following documents to be filed 21 under seal: 22 23 24 25 26 27 • Attachment 2 and 3 to Beverly Soria’s Declaration (Exhibit 2 to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment) • Attachment 2 and 3 to Dennis Morris’ Declaration (Exhibit 11 to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment) • Declaration of Owen Murray, D.O., MBA (Exhibit 6 to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment) 28 1 17-cv-00569-AJB-NLS 1 2 • Declaration of Joseph B. Marzouk, M.D. FACP (Exhibit 12 to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment) 3 • ICE Medical Records (Exhibit 3 to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment) 4 • Report of Todd Wilcox (Exhibit 1 to Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Expert 5 Opinions of Dr. Todd Wilcox) 6 Defendants contend the documents contain private information regarding Plaintiff’s 7 medical records and proprietary and security sensitive documents that memorialize 8 CoreCivic security operations and procedures. (Doc. No. 87 at 2.) 9 Courts have historically recognized a “general right to inspect and copy public 10 records and documents, including judicial records and documents.” Nixon v. Warner 11 Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978). “Unless a particular court record is one 12 ‘traditionally kept secret,’ a ‘strong presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” 13 Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Foltz 14 v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). In order to 15 overcome this strong presumption, a party seeking to seal a judicial record must articulate 16 compelling justifications for sealing that outweigh the public policies favoring disclosure. 17 See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79. “In turn, the court must ‘conscientiously balance[] 18 the competing interests’ of the public and the party who seeks to keep certain judicial 19 records secret.” Id. at 1179 (citation omitted). 20 After a careful examination of the documents, the Court agrees with Defendants and 21 finds that despite the generally recognized right to inspect records and documents in this 22 country, Defendants have overcome this strong presumption of access by providing 23 compelling reasons to seal. See Nixon, 435 U.S. at 597 & n.7; see also Pintos v. Pac. 24 Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 677–78 (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that a “compelling reasons 25 standard applies to most [motions to seal] judicial records.”) (internal quotation marks 26 omitted). 27 Here, the documents Defendants wish to seal include personal and sensitive 28 information regarding Plaintiff, including incidents that occurred when he was in federal 2 17-cv-00569-AJB-NLS 1 custody and his medical conditions. (Doc. No. 87.) The documents also include 2 information regarding CoreCivic’s security operations and procedures that if released 3 publicly present safety and security concerns. (Id.) Accordingly, balancing the need for the 4 public’s access to information and Defendants’ interest in keeping this material private 5 weighs strongly in favor of sealing. Thus, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to seal. 6 (Doc. No. 87); see Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1137 (acknowledging privacy interests implicated by 7 sensitive, personal, identifying information); see also Fosselman v. Evans, No. C 07-2606 8 PJH (PR), 2011 WL 939616, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 15, 2011) (granting a motion to seal 9 based on the finding that the documents would threaten the safety and security of the 10 institution). 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: September 17, 2019 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 17-cv-00569-AJB-NLS

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?