Roe v. Wayne County Board of Education

Filing 45

MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER SEALING DOCUMENT granting Defendant's 44 MOTION to File Exhibit 3 Under Seal; directing that Exhibit 3 to Defendant's 42 MOTION to Compel Interrogatory and Request for Production Responses be filed as SEALED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert on 12/20/2017. (cc: defendant; counsel of record) (jsa)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
HUNTINGTON DIVISION
JANE ROE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No.: 3:17-cv-00094

WAYNE COUNTY BOARD
OF EDUCATION,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
SEALING DOCUMENT
Pending is Defendant’s Motion to File “Exhibit 3” Under Seal. (ECF No. 44).
According to Defendant, Exhibit 3 contains protected health information, which has been
designated as confidential by Plaintiff. Due to the highly personal nature of Exhibit 3, the
Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that Exhibit 3 be filed as 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)
provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents
and for rejecting alternatives. Id. at 302. In this case, the attached document 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 Exhibit, but no alternatives to sealing the document are
feasible. Moreover, the public’s right to be informed is greatly outweighed by (1) the
interests to be protected in this circumstance; and (2) the fact that the Exhibit is attached
to a motion to compel discovery, not a dispositive motion. Accordingly, the Court finds
that sealing Exhibit 3 does not unduly prejudice the public’s right to access court
documents.
The Clerk is instructed to provide a copy of this Order to the defendant and all
counsel of record.
ENTERED: December 20, 2017