Mitchell v. High Desert State Prison

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 Deangelo Lamont Mitchell, Case No. 2:22-cv-00236-GMN-BNW

5 Plaintiff, ORDER re ECF Nos. 15 and 31 6 v.

7 High Desert State Prison, et al.,

8 Defendants.

9 10 Before the Court are two motions to seal. ECF Nos. 15, 31. 11 First is Defendants’ motion seeking to seal exhibits accompanying their response to 12 Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.1 ECF No. 15. No opposition has been filed. 13 Next is a similar motion by Defendants seeking to seal exhibits attached in relation to a 14 hearing on Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction.2 ECF No. 31. No opposition has been 15 filed. 16 This Court applies the case law below to each of the motions addressed in this Order. 17 I. Analysis 18 Generally, the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. Kamakana v. City & 19 Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Such records are presumptively publicly 20 accessible. Id. Consequently, a party seeking to seal a judicial record bears the burden of 21 overcoming this strong presumption. Id. In the case of dispositive motions, the party seeking to 22 seal the record must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that 23 outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the 24 public interest in understanding the judicial process. Id. at 1178–79 (alteration and internal 25 quotation marks and citations omitted). The Ninth Circuit has further held that the full presumption 26

27 1 The sealed exhibits are filed at ECF No. 16. 2 The sealed exhibits are filed at ECF No. 32. 1 of public access applies to technically non-dispositive motions and attached documents as well if 2 the motion is “more than tangentially related to the merits of the case.” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. 3 Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016). 4 Among the compelling reasons which may justify sealing a record are when such court 5 files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes, such as the use of records to gratify 6 private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade secrets. 7 Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (quotation omitted). However, avoiding a litigant’s embarrassment, 8 incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not, without more, compel the court to seal its 9 records. Id. 10 “[A] different standard applies to ‘private materials unearthed during discovery,’ as such 11 documents are not part of the judicial record.” Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 12 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1180). Under Rule 26(c), a court may enter a 13 protective order “to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or 14 undue burden or expense.” “The relevant standard for purposes of Rule 26(c) is whether good 15 cause exists to protect the information from being disclosed to the public by balancing the needs 16 for discovery against the need for confidentiality.” Pintos, 605 F.3d at 678 (quotation omitted). 17 Given the “weaker public interest in nondispositive materials,” the court applies the good cause 18 standard in evaluating whether to seal documents attached to a nondispositive motion. Id. 19 “Nondispositive motions ‘are often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause 20 of action,’ and, as a result, the public’s interest in accessing dispositive materials does ‘not apply 21 with equal force’ to non-dispositive materials.” Id. (citing Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179). It is 22 within the court’s discretion whether to seal documents. Id. at 679. 23 A. There are compelling reasons to seal the exhibits referenced in Defendants’ motion at ECF No. 15 24 25 Defendants seek to seal several documents filed in their response to Plaintiff’s motion for 26 preliminary injunction. These exhibits relate to Plaintiff’s medical records. ECF No. 15. 27 1 Because these documents are attached to a matter that is more than tangentially related to 2 the merits of the case, the Court applies the compelling reason standard. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 3 F.3d at 1099. 4 Here, the Court finds Defendants have demonstrated compelling reasons to seal the 5 documents in question as these detail Plaintiff’s medical history. “This Court, and others within 6 the Ninth Circuit, have recognized that the need to protect medical privacy qualifies as a 7 ‘compelling reason’ for sealing records, since medical records contain sensitive and private 8 information about a person’s health.” Pirtle v. Rosa, Case No. 3:21-CV-0324-MMD-CLB, 2021 9 WL 4810330, at *1 (D. Nev. Oct. 14, 2021) (citing cases). 10 As a result, Defendants’ motion at ECF No. 15 will be granted. 11 B. There are compelling reasons to seal the exhibits referenced in Defendants’ motion at ECF No. 31 12 13 Defendants seek to seal several exhibits filed in connection to a hearing on Plaintiff’s 14 motion for preliminary injunction. ECF No. 31. 15 Because these documents are attached to a matter that is more than tangentially related to 16 the merits of the case, the Court applies the compelling reason standard. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 17 F.3d at 1099. 18 Here, the Court finds Defendants have demonstrated compelling reasons to seal the 19 documents in question as these detail Plaintiff’s medical history. “This Court, and others within 20 the Ninth Circuit, have recognized that the need to protect medical privacy qualifies as a 21 ‘compelling reason’ for sealing records, since medical records contain sensitive and private 22 information about a person’s health.” Pirtle v. Rosa, Case No. 3:21-CV-0324-MMD-CLB, 2021 23 WL 4810330, at *1 (D. Nev. Oct. 14, 2021) (citing cases). 24 As a result, Defendants’ motion at ECF No. 31 will be granted. 25 // 26 // 27 // OL. Conclusion and Order 2 IT IS THERERFORE ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Seal at ECF No. 15 is 3 || GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to maintain under seal the exhibits at ECF No. || 16. 5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Seal at ECF No. 31 is 6 || GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to maintain under seal the exhibits at ECF No. 7 || 32. 9 DATED: August 3, 2022. 10 K pr La WEE 1 BRENDA WEKSLER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28