Kinzle v. Glebe

Filing 74

ORDER denying Petitioner's 72 Motion to Seal Exhibit A-115. Petitioner may re-file the exhibit in a manner that complies with LCR 5.2(a) no later than 4/19/2019. The exhibit currently on file with the Court will remain under seal until that date. Signed by Hon. Michelle L. Peterson. (TH)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

JEFFERY M. KINZLE,
Petitioner,

9
10
11
12

Case No. C14-703-JCC-MLP

v.
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO SEAL EXHIBIT A-115 OF
PETITIONER’S REPLY

MIKE OBENLAND,
Respondent.

13
14

This is a federal habeas action brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This matter comes before

15

the Court at the present time on Petitioner’s motion to file under seal Exhibit A-115 of

16

Petitioner’s reply to Respondent’s answer to Petitioner’s third amended petition for writ of

17

habeas corpus. Petitioner asserts in his motion that the exhibit contains information of a sensitive

18

and confidential nature which, if made public, could result in irreparable harm to Petitioner.

19

There is a strong presumption in favor of public access to court records. Kamakana v.

20

City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006); Local Civil Rule (LCR) 5(g).

21

A party seeking to seal such records must overcome this presumption by demonstrating

22

“compelling reasons” sufficient to outweigh the public’s interest in disclosure. Kamakana, 447

23

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO SEAL EXHIBIT A-115
OF PETITIONER’S REPLY - 1

1

F.3d at 1178-79. While Petitioner argues that there are compelling reasons to seal the exhibit

2

given the sensitive and confidential nature of the information contained in the document, the

3

substantive portion of the exhibit is actually set forth verbatim in Petitioner’s reply brief. (See

4

Dkt. # 71 at 18.) The only information contained in the document which might therefore be

5

deemed sensitive or confidential is Petitioner’s date of birth which should be redacted pursuant

6

to LCR 5.2(a). Petitioner has not demonstrated that sealing exhibit A-115 is either necessary or

7

appropriate.

8

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:

9

(1)

Petitioner’s motion to seal Exhibit A-115 (Dkt. # 72) is DENIED. Petitioner may

10

re-file the exhibit in a manner that complies with LCR 5.2(a) no later than April 19, 2019. The

11

exhibit currently on file with the Court will remain under seal until that date.

12
13
14

(2)

The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to

the Honorable John C. Coughenour.
DATED this 16th day of April, 2019.

15
16

A

17

MICHELLE L. PETERSON
United States Magistrate Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO SEAL EXHIBIT A-115
OF PETITIONER’S REPLY - 2