Anderson v. Clark County School District

Opinion

* * *

JEREMY ANDERSON, as guardian of the Case No. 2:24-cv-01514-CDS-EJY person and estate of WILLIAM ANDERSON, JEREMY ANDERSON (individually and as the father of William Anderson), and JULIANA ANDERSON (individually and as the mother of William Anderson), Plaintiffs, v. CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendants. Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Sealed Motion to Seal Documents. ECF No. 23. A motion to seal is not itself properly sealable unless the motion discloses substantive information sought to be sealed. The instant Motion reveals no such information. Moreover, in the event a motion to seal is itself properly sealed, the motion must also be filed in a redacted form on the publicly available docket at the same time it is filed under seal. Here, the cover sheet to Exhibit 5, the video, does not meet the standard established by the Ninth Circuit in Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006). In contrast, Exhibits 6 and 7 meet the sealing standard. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Seal Documents (ECF No. 23) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit 1 to the Motion (the cover sheet identifying Exhibit 5) is unsealed as is the Motion to Seal. Plaintiffs must refile the Motion to Seal and the cover sheet to Exhibit 5 on the publicly available docket no later than April 25, 2025.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits 2 and 3 to the Motion to Seal (Exhibits 6 and 7 to the underlying filing) are and shall remain sealed. Dated this 18th day of April, 2025.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE