Mainor v. Acctcorp of Southern Nevada et al
Filing
100
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 90 Plaintiff Carol Mainor's Motion to Seal and/or Redact Exhibits to Motion to Compel and Redact Motion Itself is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall UNSEAL 89 the Notice of Filing Unredacted Documents; 89 -1 Unredacted Motion to Compel, 89 -2 Unredacted Miles ClarkDecl., Ex. A, and 89 -3 Unredacted May 2018 Attorney Correspondence, Ex.A-10. Experian shall FILE a redacted version of the Cave ExpertReport on the public docket on or before 7/26/18, redacting any reference to the full Ocwen account number. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 7/19/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
CAROL MAINOR,
8
9
10
11
12
Case No. 2:16-cv-00183-RFB-PAL
Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC.,
(Mot. to Seal/Redact – ECF No. 90)
Defendant.
13
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Carol Mainor’s Motion to Seal and/or Redact
14
Exhibits to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel and Redact Motion Itself (ECF No. 90). This Motion is
15
referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and LR IB 1-3 of the Local Rules
16
of Practice. The court has considered the Motion and Defendant Experian Information Solutions,
17
Inc.’s (“Experian”) Response (ECF No. 93).
18
The Motion seeks leave to file under seal and/ or redact certain documents and exhibits
19
referenced in the filings related to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel (ECF No. 88), which was filed on
20
June 19, 2018, in redacted form. See Pl.’s Sealed Unredacted Docs. (ECF No. 89) (attaching Mot.
21
to Compel (ECF No. 89-1), Miles Clark Decl., Ex. A (ECF No. 89-2), May 2018 Attorney
22
Correspondence, Ex. A-10 (ECF No. 89-3), Cave Expert Report, Ex. D (ECF No. 89-4), Experian
23
DR Log, Ex. F (ECF No. 89-5)). The parties’ Stipulated Protective Order (ECF No. 80) governing
24
confidentiality obligates Plaintiff to seek leave to file confidential documents under seal.
25
Plaintiff takes the position that the motion to compel and Exhibits A, A-10, or D do not
26
meet the applicable legal standard for sealing judicial records. However, Plaintiff acknowledges
27
that the DR Log attached at Exhibit F is an internal Experian document that contains a number of
28
internal codes and has no objection to sealing that document.
1
1
In its Response (ECF No. 93), Experian requests that Exhibit F remains under seal.
2
Experian asserts that public disclosure of the confidential information contained in the D/R Log
3
compromises Experian’s trade secrets, threatens Experian’s credit reporting system, and risks the
4
misuse of Experian’s confidential information by competitors or criminals. Experian attaches the
5
declaration of a Compliance and Litigation Analyst within its Regulatory Compliance department
6
averring to the confidential nature of the D/R Log. See Mary Methvin Decl. (ECF No. 93-1).
7
Experian therefore argues that good cause exists for its sealing request related to the D/R Log.
8
Experian also asks that “the reference to the full Ocwen account number on page Exhibit D of the
9
Expert Report of Ms. Cave shall remain filed under seal and/or redacted pursuant to LR IC 6-1.”
10
Id. at 2:25–26. Experian’s Response does not address Exhibits A, A-10, or the unredacted motion
11
to compel.
12
Having reviewed and considered the matter in accordance with the Ninth Circuit’s
13
directives set forth in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006),
14
and its progeny, the court finds that Experian has met its burden of establishing good cause the
15
D/R Log in Exhibit F to remain sealed. Additionally, with regard to the Cave Expert Report in
16
Exhibit D, Experian narrowly tailored its sealing and redaction request to the extent possible by
17
only requesting that the full Ocwen account number remain under seal. Currently there is no
18
redacted version of the Cave Expert Report on the court’s docket; thus, Experian will be directed
19
to file a redacted version. No party offered particularized showing for sealing Exhibits A, A-10,
20
or the unredacted motion to compel. A blanket protective order is not sufficient to permit the filing
21
of these documents under seal.
22
Accordingly,
23
IT IS ORDERED:
24
1. Plaintiff Carol Mainor’s Motion to Seal and/or Redact Exhibits to Motion to Compel
25
and Redact Motion Itself (ECF No. 90) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN
26
PART.
27
28
2. The unredacted Cave Expert Report, Ex. D (ECF No. 89-4) and Experian D/R Log,
Ex. F (ECF No. 89-5) shall remain under seal.
2
1
3. The Clerk of the Court shall UNSEAL the Notice of Filing Unredacted Documents
2
(ECF No. 89); Unredacted Motion to Compel (ECF No. 89-1), Unredacted Miles Clark
3
Decl., Ex. A (ECF No. 89-2), and Unredacted May 2018 Attorney Correspondence, Ex.
4
A-10 (ECF No. 89-3).
5
4. Pursuant to LR IC 6-1, Experian shall FILE a redacted version of the Cave Expert
6
Report on the public docket on or before July 26, 2018, redacting any reference to the
7
full Ocwen account number.
8
Dated this 19th day of July, 2018.
9
___________________________________
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?