Greene v. Shapiro & Ingle, LLP

Filing 38

ORDER denying without prejudice 36 Renewed Motion for Leave to File Under Seal.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file a Motion to Seal along with her response to Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 24) consistent withLocal Rule 6.1, identifying the information she seeks to seal and/or redact. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 3/12/18. (mga)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:17-CV-263-RJC-DCK
LAURA B. GREENE,
Plaintiff,
v.
SHAPIRO & INGLE, LLP,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion For Leave
To File Under Seal” (Document No. 36) filed March 12, 2018. This motion has been referred to
the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is
appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion and the record, the undersigned will deny the
motion, without prejudice.
It appears that the instant motion is premature since Plaintiff is unable to specifically
identify the information she seeks to seal. While the Court is likely to allow the requested relief,
if there are no alternatives, it would assist the Court’s determination to review the material in
question. At this point, Plaintiff proposes to seal categories of information without limit. See
(Document No. 36, p.2). Moreover, Plaintiff does not indicate consultation with Defendant’s
counsel. See Local Rule 7.1(b).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion For Leave To File
Under Seal” (Document No. 36) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file a Motion to Seal along with her
response to “Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment” (Document No. 24) consistent with

Local Rule 6.1, identifying the information she seeks to seal and/or redact.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: March 12, 2018