Cuadros v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

Filing 111

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that 99 Plaintiff Luz Elena Cuadros' Motion for Leave to File her Motion to Compel Discovery and all accompanying exhibits to her motion is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 105 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File her Reply Memorandum In Support of Renewed Motion to Compel Discovery under seal is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 7/12/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4
5
6

LUZ ELENA CUADROS, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated,

7
8
9

Plaintiff,
vs.
STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY
COMPANY,

10

2:16-cv-02025-JCM-VCF
ORDER
MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL (ECF
NOS. 99 AND 105).

Defendant.

11
12

Before the Court is Plaintiff Luz Elena Cuadros’ (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Leave to File her

13

Renewed Motion to Compel Discovery and all accompanying exhibits Under Seal (ECF No. 99) and her

14

motion to file her Reply Memorandum In Support of Renewed Motion to Compel Discovery under seal.

15

(ECF No. 105). For the reasons stated below, the motions are granted.

16

Plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery in an action against State Farm Fire and Casualty

17

Company (“Defendant”) on June 14, 2018. (ECF Nos. 100, 101). In support of this motion, Plaintiff

18

attached exhibits classified as confidential under the protective order granted by the undersigned

19

Magistrate Judge. (ECF No. 99). Additional confidential documents were attached to her reply. (ECF Nos.

20

106, 107).

21

The Ninth Circuit has emphasized a strong presumption in favor of access to court records and

22

documents. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). This general

23

right to public documents, however, is not absolute. Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 598

24

(1978). The Court may allow a party to file a document under seal without redaction, pursuant to Fed. R.

25

1

Civ. P. 5.2(d). Local Rule IA 10-5 explains that a party may file a document with the court under seal if

2

accompanied by a motion for leave to file those documents under seal.

3

A party seeking to seal documents in support of a non-dispositive motion must only show “good

4

cause” exists to seal the documents in question. Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d

5

1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 2006). When a court grants a protective order to seal discovery documents, “it

6

already has determined that ‘good cause’ exists to protect this information from being disclosed to the

7

public by balancing the needs for discovery against the needs for ‘confidentiality’.” Phillips v. GMC, 307

8

F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2002). Because the motion to compel is not dispositive, and the approved

9

stipulated protective order designates the documents in question as confidential, the good cause standard

10

is met and Plaintiff’s motion to seal is granted.

11
12

ACCORDINGLY, and for good cause shown,

13

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that Plaintiff Luz Elena Cuadros’ Motion for Leave to File her Motion

14
15

to Compel Discovery and all accompanying exhibits to her motion (ECF No. 99) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File her Reply Memorandum In

16

Support of Renewed Motion to Compel Discovery under seal (ECF No. 105) is GRANTED.

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ECF Nos. 100, 107 shall remain under seal.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

DATED this 12th day of July, 2018.
_________________________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE