Pitrello v. Najera et al

Filing 55

ORDER Granting 51 Motion to Seal. The exhibit will remain under seal. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 54 Motion to Extend Time is Granted nunc pro tunc. Replies due by 4/29/2025. Signed by Chief Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 3/3/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 Mary Elizabeth Pitrello,
4

Petitioner

5 v.
6 G. Najera, et al.,
7

Respondents

Case No.: 2:22-cv-00835-APG-EJY
Order Granting Extension of Time to File
Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss to
April 29, 2025 and Granting Motion to Seal
[ECF Nos. 51, 54]

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

The respondents ask for an extension of time to file a reply in support of their motion to
dismiss Mary Elizabeth Pitrello’s amended 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. ECF No.
54. Good cause appearing, the motion is granted.
The petitioner has filed a motion for leave to file an exhibit under seal. ECF No. 51.
While there is a presumption favoring public access to judicial filings and documents, see Nixon
v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978), a party seeking to seal a judicial
record may overcome the presumption by demonstrating “compelling reasons” that outweigh the
public policies favoring disclosure, Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172,
1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted). In general, “compelling reasons” exist where the
records may be used for improper purposes. Id. at 1179 (citing Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598). Here,
the petitioner asks to file an expert report under seal because it contains private medical
information and other sensitive personal information. ECF No. 51. The court has reviewed the
report and concludes that the petitioner has demonstrated compelling reasons to file it under seal.
Accordingly, the motion is granted, and the expert report will remain under seal.

1

I THEREFORE ORDER that the respondents’ unopposed motion for extension of time to

2 file a reply in support of their motion to dismiss [ECF No. 54] is GRANTED nunc pro tunc.
3 The deadline to reply is extended to April 29, 2025.
4

I FURTHER ORDER that the petitioner’s motion for leave to file exhibit under seal

5 [ECF No. 51] is GRANTED. The exhibit will remain under seal.
6
7

DATED this 3rd day of March, 2025.

8
9
10
11

_________________________________
ANDREW P. GORDON
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

2