Seff Enterprises & Holdings LLC et al v. Butler Bank et al

Filing 2


Download PDF
Seff Enterprises & Holdings LLC et al v. Butler Bank et al Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS STANDING PROCEDURAL ORDER RE: SEALING COURT DOCUMENTS January 21, 2010 Saris, U.S.D.J. Generally speaking, the Court DENIES motions to seal memoranda and attachments in their entirety on the ground that a presumption of openness governs court filings. However, a party may redact a public filing and seek to file under seal truly confidential matters. The party seeking redaction in a court filing must have good cause for asserting confidentiality beyond mere agreement of the parties to a designation of confidentiality for a particular document or deposition under a protective order. The attorney for the party seeking protection for the redacted material shall be subject to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. If the party seeking protection is not the party filing the document, where feasible, the parties shall confer prior to filing the document on the public docket. In the event of dispute, or inability to confer in a meaningful way beforehand, the full memorandum with the confidential information shall be filed under seal pending the preparation of a redacted document to be filed publicly or resolution of the dispute. Any such redacted document shall be filed within seven (7) working days of filing the sealed document. The Court instructs the Clerk to unseal the sealed document if no timely redacted document or motion to resolve dispute is filed. /s/ Patti B. Saris ________________________________ PATTI B. SARIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?