Reynolds v. Smith et al

Filing 239

ORDER granting 233 Motion to File Document Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 2/21/2017. (agm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION DOROTHEA REYNOLDS, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action 2:11-cv-277 Judge Algenon L. Marbley Magistrate Judge Jolson ROBERT W. SMITH, et al., Defendants. ORDER On January 30, 2017, Defendants sought leave to file a numeric key to inmate names referenced in Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Accompanying Exhibits under seal. (Doc. 231). In support of their Motion, Defendants stated only that they “move[d] to file the numeric key under seal pursuant to this Court’s protective order.” (Id. at 1). On February 9, 2017, the Court denied Defendants’ Motion, but held that Defendants could “re-file a more detailed and narrowly tailored motion to seal.” (Doc. 232 at 3) (citing Blasi, 2016 WL 3765539, at *1 (noting that a proper motion to seal must “demonstrate[] a compelling reason for filing under seal, . . . must be narrowly tailored to serve that reason,” and must “analyze in detail, document by document, the propriety of secrecy, providing reasons and legal citations”)). Defendants re-filed their unopposed Motion for Leave to File Under Seal on February 15, 2017. (Doc. 233). In the instant Motion, Defendants provide the requisite specificity necessary for the Court to determine whether filing under seal is appropriate. See Shane Grp., Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich., 825 F.3d 299, 307-08 (6th Cir. 2016). Specifically, Defendants explain their statutory obligation to maintain confidentiality of all inmates’ names and how the numeric key satisfies that obligation. For those reasons, and for good cause shown, Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Under Seal (Doc. 233) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: February 21, 2017 /s/ Kimberly A. Jolson KIMBERLY A. JOLSON 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?