Gallegos v. Veolia Transportation Services

Filing 9

ORDER; The Plaintiff's requests to restrict access is GRANTED and the Settlement and Confidentiality Agreement, General Release and Covenant Not to Sue [Doc.#7] shall be RESTRICTED, Level 1, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 9/23/14. (morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02425-BNB
LISA L. GALLEGOS,
Plaintiff,
v.
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES “TRANSDEV,”
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
The plaintiff commenced this action, pro se, alleging the breach of a Settlement and
Confidentiality Agreement, General Release and Covenant Not to Sue. I will liberally construe
the plaintiff’s filings because she is not represented by an attorney. See Haines v. Kerner, 404
U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991).
In both the original Complaint [Doc. # 1] and the Amended Complaint [Doc. # 4], the
plaintiff made the following request: “I ask the Honorable Court to suppress the Settlement
Contract, at this time or I will be in violation of the contract since this complaint is public
record.” Complaint, [Doc. # 1] at p. 3. The Second Amended Complaint [Doc. # 7] does not
contain a similar request, however, and an unsigned copy of a document captioned Settlement
and Confidentiality Agreement, General Release and Covenant Not to Sue was filed by the
plaintiff, unrestricted, on September 10, 2014 [Doc. # 7].
I construe the plaintiff’s repeated requests to “suppress the Settlement Contract” as a
motion to restrict access under D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.2. Although no similar request is contained

in the Second Amended Complaint, it is apparent under a liberal construction of all of the
plaintiff’s filings that she intended for the Settlement and Confidentiality Agreement, General
Release and Covenant Not to Sue to be subject to restricted access. The plaintiff has adequately
identified the interest to be protected by restricting access and a clearly defined and serious
injury that would result if access is not restricted.
IT IS ORDERED:
(1)

The plaintiff’s requests to restrict access is GRANTED; and

(2)

The Settlement and Confidentiality Agreement, General Release and Covenant

Not to Sue [Doc. # 7] shall be RESTRICTED, Level 1.
Dated September 23, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

2