Boston Dental Group, LLC v. Affordable Care, LLC

Filing 76

ORDER that 72 and 74 the Parties' Motions to Seal are GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 9/11/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

BOSTON DENTAL GROUP, LLC,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
AFFORDABLE CARE, LLC,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
_______________________________________ )

Case No. 2:16-cv-01636-RFB-CWH

ORDER

Presently before the Court are the parties’ respective motions to seal (ECF Nos. 72, 74), filed
on August 28, and September 8, 2017. The parties represent that the motions are unopposed.
In its motion to seal (ECF No. 72), Defendant moves to seal ECF No. 49, 53, 53-2, 54, 54-3,

13

55, 62, and to unseal portions of documents previously filed unsealed. In Plaintiff’s motion to seal

14

(ECF No. 74), it moves to seal ECF Nos. 64, 65, and 66.

15

Motions to seal are generally disfavored, in deference to the public’s “general right to inspect

16

and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v.

17

City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns,

18

Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978)). Except for a narrow range of documents in criminal matters that have

19

traditionally been kept secret, there is a “strong presumption in favor of access” for court records. Id.

20

The party which seeks to seal a court record bears the burden of overcoming this presumption. Id.

21

When determining whether a record should be sealed, the court must attempt to balance the

22

competing interests of the public and the party seeking to seal the record. Id. at 1179. When

23

attempting to balance these competing interests, the potential embarrassment, incrimination, or

24

exposure to further litigation do not by themselves constitute compelling reasons. Id. A court may

25

seal a record only upon a finding of “compelling reasons,” in the case of exhibits attached to

26

dispositive motions, or “good cause” for discovery materials. Id. at 1178-1179.

27
28

Upon review, the parties have provided compelling reasons for the Court to seal these files.
The parties represent that the specified documents contain detailed financial information, and
1

1

information regarding confidential business practices, such as service and lease agreements. Given

2

the potential for misuse of such information, the Court finds compelling reason to seal these

3

documents.

4

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that parties’ motions to seal (ECF No. 72, 74) are

5

GRANTED. Defendant shall file redacted copies of any documents sealed subject to this order, if it

6

has not already done so.

7

DATED: September 11, 2017

8
9

_________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge

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