BGH Holdings, LLC et al v. DL Evans Bank

Filing 182

ORDER denying Defendant's 156 Motion to Seal. The Clerk of Court is directed to unseal the motion filed at Dkt. # 158 . Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik.(LH)

Case 2:18-cv-01408-RSL Document 182 Filed 05/18/23 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8
9

BGH HOLDINGS LLC, et al.,
Plaintiff,

10
11
12
13

v.
D.L. EVANS BANK,

Case No. C18-1408RSL
ORDER DENYING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION
TO SEAL

Defendant.

14
15

This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s “Second Motion to Seal” (Dkt.

16 # 156). Defendant filed this motion in tandem with its motion for summary judgment (Dkt.
17 # 158), as its motion for summary judgment incorporated information that plaintiffs’ previously
18 designated confidential.
19

“There is a strong presumption of public access to the court’s files,” and, absent a

20 showing that the public’s right of access is outweighed by the interests of the public and/or the
21 parties in shielding the material from public view, a seal is not appropriate. LCR 5(g).
22 Accordingly, parties are expected to explore all alternatives to filing a document under seal. Id.
23 5(g)(1). In its recent summary judgment Order, the Court reminded the parties of the procedure
24 for filing a document under seal in accordance with the Court’s local rules. See Dkt. # 176.
25 Specifically, the Court ordered the parties to meet and confer on the need to file the document
26 under seal in compliance with Local Rule 5(g)(3)(A). Id. The Court further specified that if the
27 parties found the motion must be filed under seal, plaintiffs must file a response to defendant’s
28
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
SEAL - 1

Case 2:18-cv-01408-RSL Document 182 Filed 05/18/23 Page 2 of 2

1 motion to seal, providing the reasons for keeping the document under seal pursuant to LCR
2 5(g)(3)(B). Id.
3

On May 12, 2023, defendant filed a “report,” informing the Court that the parties have

4 conferred as directed and have agreed that the motion filed at Dkt. # 158 “need not be sealed.”
5 Dkt. # 180 at 2. Accordingly, the Court DENIES defendant’s motion to seal (Dkt. # 156). The
6 Clerk of Court is directed to unseal the motion filed at Dkt. # 158.
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9
10

DATED this 18th day of May, 2023.

11
12
13
14

A
Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
SEAL - 2