Boblitt v. BP Exploration & Production, Inc.

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: February 6, 2025
• Docket: 8:20-cv-01637
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

RODNEY EUGENE BOBLITT,

Plaintiff, v. Case No. 8:20-cv-1637-CEH-AAS

BP EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION INC., BP AMERICA PRODUCTION COMPANY,

Defendants. _______________________________________/

ORDER

Plaintiff Rodney Boblitt requests an order permitting him to file Exhibits 1–4, 6, and 7 to his Response to Motion to Compel Deposition Answers under seal. (Doc. 126). Defendants BP Exploration & Production Inc. and BP America Production Company (BP) filed a memorandum supporting Mr. Boblitt’s motion to seal. (Doc. 130). The public has a common-law right of access to judicial proceedings, which includes the right to inspect and copy public records and court documents. See Chicago Trib. Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1311 (11th Cir. 2001). However, “[t]he common law right of access may be overcome by a showing of good cause, which requires balancing the asserted right of access against the other party’s interest in keeping the information 1 confidential.” Romero v. Drummond Co., Inc., 480 F.3d 1234, 1246 (11th Cir. 2007). Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 6 contain the Expert Reports of Dr. Robert Adams, Dr. Damian Shea, Dr. Robert Haddad, and Naomi Oreskes, respectively. BP’s

expert reports respond to and address methodology using information designated as confidential by BP and third parties under protective orders in a separate action, Culliver v. BP Exploration & Prod. Inc., et al., Case Nos. 3:21-cv-4942 and 3:22-mc-6 (N.D. Fla.). Thus, good cause exists to file Exhibits

1, 2, 3, and 6 to Mr. Boblitt’s Response to BP’s Motion to Compel Deposition Answers under seal. Exhibit 4 contains excerpts from Mr. Rob Barrick’s Deposition dated December 13, 2024. The excerpts contain personal information about Mr.

Barrick’s family. Exhibit 7 contains email correspondence between BP employees, contractors, counsel, and employees of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). These emails include discussions between NOAA, BP, and BP’s third-party contractors that would lead to the

results of chemical analysis relied on by Dr. Adams (Exhibit 1) and Dr. Shea (Exhibit 2) in their sealed expert reports. Thus, good cause exists to file Exhibits 4 and 7 to Mr. Boblitt’s Response to BP’s Motion to Compel Deposition Answers under seal. 2 Accordingly, Mr. Boblitt’s motion for an order permitting him to file Exhibits 1—4, 6, and 7 to his Response to BP’s Motion to Compel Deposition Answers under seal (Doc. 126) is GRANTED. Absent a future order to the contrary, these documents will remain under seal until ninety days after the

case is closed and all appeals exhausted. See Local Rule 1.11, M.D. Fla. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on February 6, 2025. Atranda. Agneth. Saree AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE United States Magistrate Judge