Florence v. Cenlar Federal Savings and Loan et al

Filing 181

ORDER Granting 180 Motion to Seal Specified Exhibits. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 5/25/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
REGINA FLORENCE,
11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
CENLAR FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN, et al.,
14
Defendant(s).
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:16-cv-00587-GMN-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 180)

16

Pending before the Court is the joint motion to seal certain of Defendant Experian’s business

17

materials submitted in relation to the pending motions for summary judgment. Docket No. 180.1 The

18

Ninth Circuit has held that there is a strong presumption of public access to judicial records. See

19

Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Parties “who seek to

20

maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high threshold of

21

showing that ‘compelling reasons’ support secrecy.” Id. at 1180. Those compelling reasons must

22

outweigh the competing interests of the public in having access to the judicial records and understanding

23

the judicial process. Id. at 1178-79. In this case, the parties seek to seal business documents that

24

Experian has invested significant money into creating, that it has kept secret, and the unsealing of which

25

would give its competitors an unfair business advantage. See, e.g., Docket No. 180 at 15-18 (Methvin

26
27
28

1

The Court has elsewhere addressed at length the pertinent standards and considerations for such
a motion. Docket Nos. 111, 160. For the sake of brevity, such discussion will not be repeated.

1

Decl.). The Court concludes that the motion establishes compelling reasons for the sealing of this

2

information that outweigh the public’s interests in accessing it. See, e.g., Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179

3

(identifying trade secrets as one type of information for which sealing is appropriate under the

4

compelling reasons standard). The Court further finds that redaction is not feasible.

5

Accordingly, the motion to seal is hereby GRANTED.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

DATED: May 25, 2017

8
9

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2