Allstate Insurance Company et al v. Belsky et al

Filing 69

ORDER granting ECF No. 61 Motion for Leave to File Under Seal; directing Clerk to seal exhibits 1-F and 1-G of ECF No. 60 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 8/31/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) MARJORIE BELSKY, MD, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) _______________________________________ ) Case No. 2:15-cv-02265-MMD-CWH ORDER Presently before the court is Defendants’ motion (ECF No. 61) for leave to file under seal, filed on July 29, 2016. Plaintiffs have not filed a response. Defendants represent that two documents submitted to the court contain sensitive information 13 and should be sealed. Specifically, Defendants request that the court seal exhibits 1-F and 1-G in 14 their appendix (ECF No. 60) supporting their response (ECF No. 58) to Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 15 53) to dismiss. Defendants represent that exhibit 1-F contains confidential medical information of a 16 non-party, and that exhibit 1-G contains financial information pertaining to Plaintiff Allstate 17 Insurance Company. 18 For most judicial records, a motion to seal is considered under a “compelling reasons” 19 standard. See Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.2006) 20 (holding that “[a] party seeking to seal a judicial record ... bears the burden of ... meeting the 21 ‘compelling reasons' standard”). This standard derives from the common law right “to inspect and 22 copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana, 447 23 F.3d at 1178 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). To limit this common law right of 24 access, a party seeking to seal judicial records must show that “compelling reasons supported by 25 specific factual findings ... outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring 26 disclosure.” Id. at 1178–79 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Pintos v. Pac. 27 Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 665, 677–78 (9th Cir. 2010). 28 Here, Defendants represent that the exhibits to their appendix (ECF No. 60) contain a non- 1 party’s medical records, and financial records of an opposing party. Upon review, the court agrees 2 that the respective parties’ privacy interests outweigh the general presumption of public disclosure of 3 court documents. 4 5 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ motion (ECF No. 61) for leave to file under seal is GRANTED. The Clerk must SEAL exhibits 1-F and 1-G of ECF No. 60. 6 7 DATED: August 31, 2016. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _________________________________ C.W. Hoffman, Jr. United States Magistrate Judge

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?