Crespin v. Nevada Department of Corrections

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 REYNALDO CRESPIN, 4 Plaintiff, Case No.: 2:23-cv-01059-GMN-DJA 5 vs. 6 ORDER NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF 7 CORRECTIONS, et al.

8 Defendants. 9 Pending before the Court is the Motion to Seal Document, (ECF No. 57), filed by 10 Plaintiff Reynaldo Crespin. Plaintiff’s Motion asks the Court to seal Defendant’s Response to 11 the Order to Show Cause, (ECF No. 52). A party seeking to seal a document related to a non- 12 dispositive motion must meet the “good cause” standard set forth by Federal Rule of Civil 13 Procedure 26(c). Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1128-1130 (9th Cir. 14 2003); see also Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006). 15 The Court finds that, though Plaintiff has not met the burden of showing that the entire 16 documents should be sealed, there is good cause to redact the portions of the Response 17 containing confidential information from the parties’ settlement conference consistent with 18 Local Rule 16-5. LR 16-5 (“Unless agreed to by the parties or ordered by the court, no 19 disclosure may be made to anyone, including the judicial officer to whom the case is assigned, 20 of any confidential dispute-resolution communication that reveals the parties’ dispute- 21 resolution positions . . . .”). And because Defendant’s Objection to the Magistrate Judge’s 22 Order, (ECF No. 70), also contains confidential information from the parties’ settlement 23 conference, Defendant is ordered to file a redacted version of that Objection consistent with 24 Local Rule 16-5. 25 /// 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal, (ECF No. 57), is 3 GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Plaintiff’s Motion is granted to the extent it seeks 4 || to redact Defendant’s Response. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to seal ECF No. 52, and 5 || file Exhibit 1 to Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal, ECF No. 57-1), on the docket. 6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant file a redacted version of its Objection to 7 || Magistrate Judge Order, (ECF No. 70), consistent with Local Rule 16-5. The Clerk of Court is 8 || kindly directed to seal ECF No. 70. 9 Dated this _23_ day of April, 2025. 10 j Yj, 11 LL __ Gloria M. Nayarro, District Judge 12 United Na District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 2 of 2