Melgarejo v. Allstate Insurance Company

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: June 21, 2022
• Docket: 2:22-cv-00427
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 BLANCA ESQUERRE MELGAREJO, Case No.: 2:22-cv-00427-APG-VCF

4 Plaintiff Order Sealing ECF No. 7 and Directing Plaintiff to File a Redacted Version 5 v.

6 ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY and DASHAWN SELBY, 7 Defendants 8

9 Plaintiff Blanca Melgarejo attached to her motion to remand hundreds of pages of 10 exhibits that include medical records, a traffic report, and voluntary statements. ECF No. 7. The 11 filing violates Local Rule IC 6-1(a), which directs parties to “refrain from including” or 12 “partially redact, where inclusion is necessary” personal identifying information, including social 13 security numbers, dates of birth, and home addresses. “The responsibility for redacting these 14 personal identifiers rests solely with attorneys and the parties.” LR IC 6-1(c). 15 The filing also includes confidential medical information that appears to be unrelated to 16 the basis for the plaintiff’s motion to remand. There is good cause for sealing the medical 17 records attached to the non-dispositive motion to remand and requiring the plaintiff to prepare a 18 redacted version of her filing. See Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 19 (9th Cir. 2006); Friedman v. Aranas, No. 3:17-cv-00433-MMD-WGC, 2019 WL 3502900, at *2 20 (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2019) (stating that the “need to protect medical privacy qualifies as a 21 compelling reason for sealing records” (internal quotation marks omitted)). While the plaintiff 22 has put certain aspects of her medical condition and treatment at issue in this case, “that does not 23 mean that the entirety of [her] medical records filed in connection with a motion (which 1} frequently contain records that pertain to unrelated medical information) need be unnecessarily 2|| broadcast to the public.” Jd. The plaintiffs interest in keeping her sensitive health information confidential outweighs the public’s need for direct access to the medical records, particularly 4! when those records are not material to the issue raised in the motion to which they are attached. 5 Consequently, I direct the clerk of court to seal ECF No. 7. I further order the plaintiff to file a redacted version of her motion consistent with the Local Rules and Kamakana. 7 I THEREFORE ORDER the clerk of court to seal ECF No. 7. 8 I FURTHER ORDER that by July 1, 2022, plaintiff Blanca Melgarejo shall file a 9|| redacted version of ECF No. 7 consistent with Local Rule IC 6-1(c) and Kamakana v. City & 10|| of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006). 11 DATED this 21st day of June, 2022. 12 Z. 8 ANDREWP.GORDON. 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23