Banuchi v. Equifax Information Services, LLC et al

Filing 24

ORDER granting in part 23 Motion to Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Embry J. Kidd on 8/1/2022. (IRM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION ENRIQUE BANUCHI, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 6:22-cv-588-GAP-EJK EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC and UNIVERSAL CREDIT SERVICES, LLC, Defendants. ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Seal (the “Motion”), filed July 27, 2022. (Doc. 23.) Therein, Plaintiff requests leave of Court to seal the filed exhibits to the Complaint, stating that they inadvertently contain two legible social security numbers that should have been redacted. (Id. at 2.) Upon consideration, the Motion is due to be granted in part. While the Eleventh Circuit recognizes a “presumptive common law right to inspect and copy judicial records,” United States v. Rosenthal, 763 F.2d 1291, 1292–93 (11th Cir. 1985), a party may overcome the public’s right to access by demonstrating good cause. Romero v. Drummond Co., Inc., 480 F.3d 1234, 1246 (11th Cir. 2007); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978) (“It is uncontested, however, that the right to inspect and copy judicial records is not absolute. Every court has supervisory power over its own records and files, and access has been denied where court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes.”). If good cause is shown, the court must balance the interest in obtaining access to the information against the interest in keeping the information confidential. See Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1309 (11th Cir. 2001). Here, Plaintiff notes that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(a) requires filings containing an individual’s social security number to include only “the last four digits of the social-security number.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a)(1). As this information is subject to redaction pursuant to Rule 5.2(a), the undersigned finds good cause to seal the documents. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion to Seal (Doc. 23) is GRANTED IN PART. The Clerk is DIRECTED to SUBSTITUTE the newly redacted exhibits (Doc. 23-1) attached to the Motion for the previously filed exhibits to the Complaint (Doc. 1-1), and to STRIKE from the docket the previously filed exhibits (Doc. 1-1). DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on August 1, 2022. -2-

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?