McDaniel v. Diaz

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID MCDANIEL, Case No. 1:20-cv-00856-NONE-SAB

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S REQUEST TO PLACE UNDER SEAL v. EXHIBIT TO MOTION TO DISMISS

RALPH DIAZ, et al., (ECF No. 46)

Defendants. SEVEN DAY DEADLINE

David McDaniel (“Plaintiff”) filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 22, 2020. On December 14, 2020, Defendants Tania Brown, Rhona Delacruz, Joseph Guerrero, Nichelle Harrington, Elijah Pruitt, and Brandy Smith filed a motion to dismiss and request for judicial notice. (ECF Nos. 40, 41.) On December 30, 2020, Defendants filed a request to strike or seal an exhibit that was attached to the motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 46.) Defendants assert that a check was attached to the motion to dismiss that inadvertently contained private account information for Plaintiff’s counsel’s checking account. Attached to the motion is a copy of the check with the account information redacted. Courts have long recognized a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n. 7 (1978)). Nevertheless, this access to judicial records is not absolute. Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1172. The court has recognized a category of documents that is not subject to the right of public access because the documents have “traditionally been kept secret for important policy reasons.” Times Mirror Co. v. United States, 873 F.2d 1210, 1219 (9th Cir. 1989). Where documents such as those presented here are accompanying a motion for resolution of disputes on the merits that “is at the heart of the interest in ensuring the ‘public’s understanding of the judicial process and of significant public events[,] . . . “ ‘compelling reasons’ must be shown to seal judicial records attached to a dispositive motion.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. The party seeking to have the document sealed must present “articulable facts” identifying the interests that favor secrecy and show that these specific interests overcome the presumption of access because they outweigh the public’s interest in understanding the judicial process. Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1180. The Court starts from the strong presumption in favor of access to public records and then considers whether the party seeking to have the record sealed has demonstrated a compelling reason to have the record sealed. Id. at 1178-79. This requires the Court to conscientiously balance the competing interests of the public in accessing the records and the party who seeks to keep the records secret. Id. at 1179. The Court is required to “articulate the factual basis for its ruling, without relying on hypothesis or conjecture.” Id. (citations omitted). Here, Defendants seek to place under seal the account information on a check used to pay the fees associated with filing the plaintiff’s government claim form. The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to place the document under seal. The information contained on the exhibit is the type of information that is could be misused and cause significant harm to counsel. This weighs heavily in favor of placing the record under seal. Further, the exhibit itself has little relevancy to the issues to be decided in this action. While the Court may be considering whether a claim form was timely filed, the manner of payment of the fee is not at issue. Therefore, sealing the document will not interfere with the public’s interest in understanding the judicial process. The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to place the documents under seal and shall grant the request. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The request to seal or strike private information, filed December 30, 2020, is GRANTED; 2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to place Defendants’ request for judicial notice (ECF No. 41) and Defendants’ request to strike or seal private information (ECF No. 46) under seal; 3. Within seven (7) days of the date of entry of this order, Defendants shall file the request for judicial notice and request to strike or seal private information in the record without the sealed exhibit (ECF No. 41 at p. 8 and ECF No. 46 at p. 8). i IT IS SO ORDERED. FA. ee Dated: _ December 30, 2020

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE