Lindsey v. Bryant

Filing 35

ORDER granting Defendant's Motion to Seal, ECF No. 30 , and Plaintiff's medical records are to be filed under seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 4/13/2016. (mcot, ) Modified on 4/14/2016 to correct filing date (mcot, ).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Joshua James Lindsey, #337571,

Plaintiff,
v.

Lt. Johnnie Bryant,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No.: 5:15-cv-03319-PMD-KDW

ORDER ON
MOTION TO FILE
DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

This matter comes before the court on Defendant’s Motion to File Plaintiff’s medical
records under seal as part of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 30.
Applicable law and the Local Rules of this court provide specific guidance regarding
consideration of a motion to seal. See Local Civ. Rule 5.03 (D.S.C.) (setting out procedure to be
followed in moving to seal documents filed with the court). In conducting its review, the court is
guided by Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288, 302 (4th Cir. 2000). In that case, the Fourth
Circuit found that “a district court ‘has supervisory power over its own records and may, in its
discretion, seal documents if the public’s right of access is outweighed by competing interests.’”
(citing In re Knight Pub. Co., 743 F.2d 231, 235 (4th Cir. 1984)). The court’s discretion
notwithstanding, the court cannot ignore the presumption in favor of public access. Ashcraft, 218
F.3d at 302. Accordingly, in order to seal documents, the court must: “(1) provide public notice
of the request to seal and allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, (2) consider
less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) provide specific reasons and factual
findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives.” Id.

The public-notice requirement has been satisfied by Defendant’s electronic filing of the
motion to seal, which includes a descriptive, non-confidential description of the documents he
seeks to have filed under seal. ECF No. 30. See Local Civ. Rule 5.03(D) (requiring provision of
public notice of the motion to seal and finding the docketing of such a motion to satisfy that
requirement). Defendant filed the Motion on March 10, 2016, and no one has opposed
Defendant’s Motion to Seal.
Based on the court’s consideration of the documents Defendant seeks to seal, the court
finds that it is appropriate to grant Defendants’ Motion. Further, the court considered less-drastic
alternatives to sealing Plaintiff’s medical records but finds no reasonable less-drastic alternative
available. The documents sought to be filed under seal contain or consist of Plaintiff’s
confidential medical information.
The court, therefore, grants Defendant’s Motion to Seal, ECF No. 30, and Plaintiff’s
medical records are to be filed under seal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

April 13, 2016
Florence, South Carolina

Kaymani D. West
United States Magistrate Judge

2