Citynet, LLC v. Frontier West Virginia, Inc., et al.
Filing
374
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING EXHIBIT D TO PLAINTIFF'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS THIRD MOTION TO COMPEL granting Plaintiff's 372 MOTION to Seal Exhibit D; the Clerk is directed to file Exhibit D as sealed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert on 6/21/2022. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented parties) (lca)
Case 2:14-cv-15947 Document 374 Filed 06/21/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 7529
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
CITYNET, LLC, on behalf of
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No.: 2:14-cv-15947
FRONTIER WEST VIRGINIA, INC.,
et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING
EXHIBIT D TO PLAINTIFF’S REPLY IN SUPPORT
OF ITS THIRD MOTION TO COMPEL
Pending before the Court is the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Under Seal,
(ECF No. 372), requesting Exhibit D to its Reply in Support of its Third Motion to Compel
be filed as sealed. The Court notes that the attached Exhibit D contains confidential
information. Due to the confidential nature of this information, this Court GRANTS
Plaintiff’s motion to seal and ORDERS the Clerk to file Exhibit D to Plaintiff’s Reply in
Support of its Third Motion to Compel, (ECF No. 372-1) as sealed. The Motion itself, (ECF
No. 372), should not be sealed.
The undersigned is cognizant of the well-established Fourth Circuit precedent
recognizing a presumption in favor of public access to judicial records. Ashcraft v.
Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288 (4th Cir. 2000). As stated in Ashcraft, before sealing a
document, the Court must follow a three-step process: (1) provide public notice of the
request to seal; (2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the document; and (3)
Case 2:14-cv-15947 Document 374 Filed 06/21/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 7530
provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents
and for rejecting alternatives. Id. at 302. In this case, Exhibit D to Plaintiff’s Reply in
Support of its Third Motion to Compel shall be sealed and will be designated as sealed on
the Court’s docket. The Court deems this sufficient notice to interested members of the
public. The Court has considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the document, but in
view of the nature of the information set forth in the document—which is information
generally protected from public release—alternatives to wholesale sealing are not feasible
at this time. Moreover, the information provided in this Exhibit is for the purpose of
resolving a discovery dispute, rather than for disposition of substantive claims in this
action. Accordingly, the Court finds that sealing Exhibit D to Plaintiff’s Reply in Support
of its Third Motion to Compel does not unduly prejudice the public’s right to access court
documents. Accordingly, the Clerk is DIRECTED to file Exhibit D to Plaintiff’s Reply in
Support of its Third Motion to Compel, (ECF Nos. 372-1), under seal.
The Clerk is instructed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any
unrepresented parties.
ENTERED: June 21, 2022
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?