Zeng v. Marshall University

Filing 350

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING EXHIBITS granting Defendants' 335 MOTION to Seal Exhibits; directing the Clerk of Court to seal the documents referenced herein. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert on 9/17/2019. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (jsa) (Modified on 9/17/2019 to add link to #335 motion) (mkw).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
HUNTINGTON DIVISION
WEI-PING ZENG,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No.: 3:17-cv-03008

MARSHALL UNIVERSITY, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING EXHIBITS
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Seal Exhibits, (ECF No. 335).
The exhibits referenced by Defendants contain protected health information and are
entitled to a higher level of confidentiality than most documents. Accordingly, for good
cause shown, the Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS the Clerk of Court to seal
the following documents: ECF Nos. 335-1, 335-2, 335-3, 335-4, 335-5 and ECF Nos. 3417, 341-10, 341-11, 341-12, 341-13.
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 exhibits shall be sealed and shall
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 exhibits, but in view of the highly confidential and private nature of the
information, and the format on which the information is provided, no such alternatives
are feasible at this time. Moreover, the public’s right to be informed is outweighed by the
right of an individual to keep his medical information protected, unless disclosure is
necessary to explain the findings and rulings of the Court. At this time, the need for
disclosure of all or part of the records is unknown. Accordingly, the Court finds that
sealing the exhibits at this time does not unduly prejudice the public’s right to access court
documents.
The Clerk is instructed to provide a copy of this Order to all counsel of record and
to any unrepresented party.
ENTERED: September 17, 2019