Barnett v. United States

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

MAJOR SEAN BARNETT,

Plaintiff, : Case No. 3:25-cv-070

- vs - District Judge Thomas M. Rose Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

: Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SEAL CASE

This case is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal the Case (ECF No. 15) which Defendants oppose in part (ECF No. 19). The Court finds that Plaintiff has not satisfied, at least as of yet, the requirements for sealing the entire case adopted by the Sixth Circuit. Shane Group., Inc., v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, 825 F.3d 299, 306 (6th Cir. 2016)(Kethledge, J.). However, the Clerk recognized the sensitive nature of the documents attached to the proposed Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 16) and ordered access to it restricted under Fed.R.Civ.P. 5.2(e)(2). The Court finds there is good cause for that restriction and orders that it continue until further order of the Court. Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal is otherwise denied without prejudice to its renewal upon a showing of compliance with Shane Group. IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 11, 2025. s/ Michael R. Merz United States Magistrate Judge