Ashcraft v. Welk Resort Group, Corp. et al

Filing 55

AMENDED ORDER re 40 Motion to Seal, filed by Experian Information Solutions, Inc. No later than 9/8/17, Experian shall file a supplement explaining (1) whether the compelling reasons standard applies to the instant motion to seal and, if the Cour t determines that it does apply, (2) whether compelling reasons exist sufficient to justify sealing the material. Plaintiff is not required to file anything further regarding the motion to seal, but he may also file a supplement on these issues if he would like to do so, by 9/8/17. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 8/31/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) Modified on 9/1/2017 to reflect correct document title (ADR).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
JOHN E. ASHCRAFT,
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
Plaintiff(s),
)
)
v.
)
)
WELK RESORT GROUP, CORP, et al.,
)
)
Defendant(s).
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:16-cv-02978-JAD-NJK
AMENDED ORDER
(Docket No. 40)

16

Pending before the Court is a sealing motion related to the reply brief to the previous motion for

17

leave to amend the complaint. Docket No. 40; see also Docket No. 26 (reply to motion for leave to amend).

18

Experian seeks to keep the information secret based on the “good cause” standard applicable to “non-

19

dispositive” motions. See Docket No. 40 at 6 (asserting that “good cause” exists for redaction). The Ninth

20

Circuit has clarified that the terms “dispositive” and “non-dispositive” are not intended to be mechanical

21

classifications. See Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1098 (9th Cir. 2016).

22

Instead, determining the applicable standard is premised on “whether the motion at issue is more than

23

tangentially related to the underlying cause of action.” Id. at 1099. Moreover, other courts have held that

24

the compelling reasons standard applies to motions to seal related to motions to amend the pleadings. See,

25

e.g., Macias v. Cleaver, 2016 WL 3549257, at *3 (E.D. Cal. June 30, 2016) (citing Whitecryption Corp.

26

v. Arxan Techs., Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. Lexis 31108, *3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2016)).

27

The parties have failed to address whether the motion for leave to amend “is more than tangentially

28

related to the underlying cause of action,” such that the more demanding “compelling reasons” standard

1

applies to the motion to seal. No later than September 8, 2017, Experian shall file a supplement explaining

2

(1) whether the compelling reasons standard applies to the instant motion to seal and, if the Court

3

determines that it does apply, (2) whether compelling reasons exist sufficient to justify sealing the material.

4

Plaintiff is not required to file anything further regarding the motion to seal, but he may also file a

5

supplement on these issues if he would like to do so, by September 8, 2017.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

Dated: August 31, 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