Wade v. Sandoval et al

Filing 72

ORDER Granting Plaintiff's 70 Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 8/3/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10
11
12

BRIAN WADE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
DORIS PARENTEAU, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:16-cv-00129-JCM-GWF
ORDER

13
14
15
16

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal
(ECF No. 70), filed on July 31, 2017.
Plaintiff requests leave to file Exhibits 3, 4, 5, and 8 to his response to Defendant Parentau’s

17

Motion for Summary Judgment under seal. The Ninth Circuit comprehensively examined the

18

presumption of public access to judicial files and records in Kamakana v. City and County of

19

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006). There, the court recognized that different interests are at

20

stake in preserving the secrecy of materials produced during discovery and materials attached to

21

dispositive motions. The Kamakana court held that a “good cause” showing is sufficient to seal

22

documents produced during discovery. Id. at 1180. However, the Kamakana decision also held that

23

a showing of “compelling reasons” is needed to support the secrecy of documents attached to

24

dispositive motions. A showing of “good cause” does not, without more, satisfy the “compelling

25

reasons” test required to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions. Id.

26

To meet the compelling reasons standard, the moving party “must overcome a strong

27

presumption of access by showing that compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings

28

outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure.” Dish Network

1

L.L.C., 2009 WL 2224596 at *7 (citing Pintos, 565 F.3d at 1116); see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at

2

1179–80. “Under the ‘compelling reasons' standard, a district court must weigh relevant factors, base

3

its decision on a compelling reason, and articulate a factual basis for its ruling without relying on

4

hypothesis or conjecture.” Id. “Relevant factors include the public interest in understanding the

5

judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in improper use of the material for

6

scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets.” Id.

7

Plaintiff seeks to file a booking summary, presentence reports, and disciplinary history of a

8

non-party inmate under seal. The Court finds that both good cause and compelling reasons exist to

9

seal the exhibits. On balance, the potential harm of disclosure of confidential information contained

10

in the presentence reports, booking summary, and disciplinary history of an inmate who is not a party

11

to this matter outweighs the public’s right to access the documents. The Court, therefore, grants

12

Plaintiff’s request to seal Exhibits 3, 4, 5, and 8 to his response to Defendant’s Motion for Summary

13

Judgment. Accordingly,

14
15
16

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal
(ECF No. 70) is granted.
DATED this 3rd day of August, 2017.

17
18
19

______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2