Earp et al v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Filing 167

ORDER granting 125 Motion to Seal. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 4/27/2014. (Sawyer, D.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
Case No. 5:11-cv-00680-D

JIMMY EARP AND PATRICIA EARP,
Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

NOV ARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS
CORPORATION,
Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on the consent motion of Defendant Novartis
Pharmaceuticals Corporation ("Novartis") to seal Plaintiffs' Proposed Sealed Exhibit (D.E. No.
I 15), pursuant to Local Rule 79.2 and Section T(1)(a) of the Electronic Case Filing
Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual ("ECF Manual"). The proposed sealed exhibit is
Exhibit 13 to Plaintiffs' Omnibus Motion in Limine to Exclude Certain Evidence at Trial (D.E. No.
112), also filed at Docket Entry Number 113-4.
The public has been given advance notice ofNovartis's request to seal, and the motion to
seal has been docketed well in advance of this Court's decision on such motion. See In re Knight

Publishing Co., 743 F.2d. 231 (4th Cir. 1984). No objection has been made on the docket.
Because the document to be sealed supports a non-dispositive motion to exclude, it is not
subject to a First Amendment right to access by the public. See Rusliford v. New Yorker

Magazine, Inc., 846 F.2d. 249, 253 (4th Cir. 1988). Even ifthis Court were to conclude that the
First Amendment is applicable to this motion to exclude, the Court finds the justification behind
sealing this information to be compelling, particularly in light of no opposition from the public.
The Court also believes that maintaining this document under seal is narrowly tailored to that

interest. Further, countervailing interests in sealing the document overcome the weaker common
law presumption of access.
For good cause shown, and after reviewing the papers submitted, as well as the criteria
set forth in Local Rule 79.2 and Section T(1)(a) ofthe ECF Manual, the Court hereby GRANTS
Novartis's motion to seal and orders that the word "proposed" be removed from Docket Entry
115.
SO ORDERED. This .J:L day

of~~ 2014.

ao. --

.Oo>JOI.A

JA
S C. DEVER III
Chief United States District Judge

2