Bliss v. CoreCivic, Inc.

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 KATHLEEN BLISS, on behalf of herself, Case No. 2:18-cv-01280-JAD-EJY the Proposed Nationwide Rule 23 Class, 5 and the Proposed Nevada Subclass, ORDER 6 Plaintiff,

7 v.

8 CORECIVIC, INC.,

9 Defendant.

10 11 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal. ECF No 229. Plaintiff seeks a Court Order 12 sealing her Motion for Class Certification along with two Declarations and numerous Exhibits 13 attached to the same. Plaintiff states that the material she seeks to seal has either been marked 14 “Confidential / Attorneys’ Eyes Only” by Defendant or, in Plaintiff’s judgment, should be sealed, as 15 it relates to the materials marked confidential. Id. at 1-2. 16 As the party seeking to seal a judicial record, Plaintiffs must meet their burden of overcoming 17 the strong presumption in favor of access and public policies favoring disclosure. Kamakana v. City 18 and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that those who seek to 19 maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high threshold of 20 showing that “compelling reasons” support secrecy). However, where a party seeks to seal 21 documents attached to a non-dispositive motion, the “public policies that support the right of access 22 to dispositive motions … do not apply with equal force ….” Id., 417 F.3d at 1179 (citation omitted). 23 A motion for class certification falls in the dispositive motion category. Adtrader, Inc. v. Google 24 LLC, Case No. 17-CV-07082-BLF, 2020 WL 6391210, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020) (collecting 25 cases) (“[T]he compelling reasons standard applies to motions to seal documents relating to class 26 certification.”). 27 The mere fact that the production of records may lead to a party’s embarrassment, 1 || Foltz v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2002 2 || Compelling reasons require a demonstration of something more, such as when court files ha’ 3 || become a vehicle for improper purposes, including use of records to gratify private spite, promo 4 || public scandal, disseminate libelous statements, or circulate trade secrets. Nixon v. Warn 5 || Commce’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). 6 Regarding information touching on business operations, proprietary information, a1 7 || internal policies and procedures, a reviewing court may grant the motion to seal if there a 8 || compelling reasons sufficient to outweigh the public’s interest in disclosure of the informatio 9 || Callahan v. PlusFour, Inc., Case No. 2:17-CV-2513 JCM (GWE), 2019 WL 302492, at *5 (D. Ne 10 || Jan. 23, 2019), citing Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178-79. There is also an interest in keeping tl 11 || information and interests of non-party employees secret. Aevoe Corp. v. AE Tech. Co., No. 2:1 12 || cv-00053-GMN-NJK, 2013 WL 5923426, at *2 (D. Nev. Nov. 1, 2013). 13 The Court reviewed the instant Motion to Seal and all Exhibits sought to be sealed. TI 14 || Court finds Plaintiff's sealing request is supported by compelling reasons. The Exhibits inclu 15 || excerpts of various depositions, declarations of individuals, email chains, and scans of compat 16 || handbooks and other property containing proprietary business information as well as descriptions a1 17 || discussions of Defendant’s internal policies. The Court further finds compelling reasons to se 18 || several Exhibits containing information relating to the activities of nonparty business entities. 19 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Seal Exhibits PX3, PX 20 || PX42, PX44-PX63, PX69-PX70, and PX72-PX87 to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (EC 21 || No. 229) is GRANTED. 22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits PX3, PX6-PX42, PX44-PX63, PX69-PX70, ai 23 || PX72-PX87 to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (ECF No. 228) are and shall remain seale 24 Dated this 12th day of June, 2023. * 2 2 nob 26 Vaio) | AC Vio kb 27 UNITED) TATES A Gist RATE JUDGE 28