Garcia v. Lincoln Life Assurance Company of Boston
ORDER denying as moot 31 , 37 Motions to Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 9/16/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HAM)
Case 2:21-cv-00438-RFB-NJK Document 58 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
[Docket Nos. 31, 37]
LINCOLN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY
Case No. 2:21-cv-00438-RFB-NJK
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to seal. Docket No. 31. Also pending before
13 the Court is Defendant’s motion to seal. Docket No. 37. Pursuant to the Court’s order, Docket
14 No. 48, the parties have now supplemented their sealing requests, Docket Nos. 53, 55.1
The instant sealing requests address hundreds of pages of documents filed with the Court
16 in conjunction with Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery. Docket Nos. 31, 37. In an order issued
17 concurrently herewith, the Court is denying that motion to compel without prejudice and without
18 addressing the substance of the arguments made. As such, there is no public interest with respect
19 to the documents filed under seal. Cf. Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172,
20 1179 (9th Cir. 2006) (in deciding whether to provide public access to filings, courts consider the
21 “public interest in understanding the judicial process”). Instead of addressing the sealing request,
22 the Court will instead strike the subject documents from the record. Accordingly, the Clerk’s
23 Office is INSTRUCTED to STRIKE the documents at Docket No. 31, Docket No. 31-1, Docket
24 No. 31-2, Docket No. 31-3, Docket No. 31-4, Docket No. 31-5, Docket No. 37, Docket No. 37-1,
Defendant purports therein to also supplement sealing requests related to summary
26 judgment briefing. See, e.g., Docket No. 55 at 1. Those sealing requests are not currently before
the Court and including argument on them in the instant papers is improper. See, e.g., Local Rule
27 IC 2-2(b). To the extent Defendant feels supplementation is necessary with respect to sealing
requests that are not presently at issue before the undersigned judge, then Defendant must file
28 separate documents seeking such relief.
Case 2:21-cv-00438-RFB-NJK Document 58 Filed 09/16/22 Page 2 of 2
1 Docket No. 37-2, Docket No. 37-3. The motions to seal (Docket Nos. 31, 37) are DENIED as
While the Court need not address the substance of the motions to seal in light of the above
4 order, it must note that the parties have made a mess of the docket and displayed unfamiliarity
5 with basic procedures of federal court. To the extent there is renewed motion practice on the
6 underlying discovery disputes, counsel must comply with all applicable rules, including those
7 related to moving to seal judicial filings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 16, 2022
Nancy J. Koppe
United States Magistrate Judge
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?