Wetzel

Filing 170

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. finding as moot 169 Motion for Discovery. (BG)Distributed on 4/16/2015 (jt).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION
Joel H. Wetzel,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Daniel L. Brown, et. al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

Case No. 1:09-cv-053

On April 1, 2015, defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, a supporting
memorandum, and an affidavit to which they had attached documents identified as Exhibits A through
P. Accompanying these documents were “Certificates of Service” in which defense counsel certified
that he had sent copies to plaintiff by first class mail.
On April 2, 2015, the court entered an order directing the Clerk’s office to seal defendant’s
Exhibit N–The Dickinson Police Department’s Master Incident Report for the incident that had
occurred on July 8, 2008–on account of the fact that it contained sensitive personal information, i.e.,
the birth dates of several individuals.1
On April 14, 2015, plaintiff filed a “Motion for Discovery.” He asks that the court provide
him with a copy of the Exhibit N with all sensitive personal information redacted. However, he
presumably has already been served with a copy of Exhibit N by defendants via certified mail.
Plaintiff’s motion (Docket No. 169) is therefore deemed MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 16th day of April, 2015.
/s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr.
Charles S. Miller, Jr., Magistrate Judge
United States District Court

1
Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that documents filed with the court that contain a birth date
of an individual be redacted so as to only include the year of the individual’s birth. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a). It further provides that
the court may order that a filing be made under seal without redaction. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(d).