RES Exhibit Services, LLC v. LNW Gaming, Inc. f/k/a SG Gaming, Inc. and f/k/a Bally Gaming, Inc.

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 ISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 RES EXHIBIT SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-01953-APG-EJY

5 Plaintiff,

6 v. ORDER

7 LNW GAMING, INC. f/k/a SG GAMING, INC. f/k/a BALLY GAMING, INC., 8 Defendant. 9 10 Pending before the Court are four filings: (1) ECF No. 86, Motion to Seal and Redact 11 Plaintiff-Counterdefendant RES Exhibit Services, LLC (“RES”) and Counterdefendant James 12 Leonardo’s (“Leonardo”) Emergency Motion to Stay this Action (filed under seal); (2) ECF No. 87, 13 the same Motion to Seal, but redacted; (3) ECF No. 89, Counterdefendant Jeri Wiedemer’s 14 (“Wiedemer”) Motion to Stay (not redacted and not sealed); and (4) ECF No. 90, RES and 15 Leonardo’s Motion to Seal Wiedemer’s Motion to Stay. 16 RES and Leonardo’s Motions to Seal seek to seal all reference to an ongoing criminal 17 investigation, not just the scope and direction of such investigation. No authority for sealing the fact 18 of an investigation is cited and the Court found none. “[A] litigant who might be embarrassed, 19 incriminated, or exposed to litigation through dissemination of materials is not, without more, 20 entitled to the court’s protection” through a sealing order. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 21 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal citation omitted). 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motions to Seal and Redact RES and 23 Leonardo’s Emergency Motion to Stay this Action (ECF Nos. 86 and 87) are GRANTED in part and 24 DENIED in part. 25 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that references to the fact of an ongoing criminal investigation 26 appearing in the Emergency Motion to Stay this Action (ECF No. 84) are not properly sealed; 27 whereas, references to and any discussion of the scope or direction of the investigation are properly 1 compare id. at 5:1-3 (starting with the words “The investigation involves” and ending with “with 2 LNW”), which are properly sealed. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any references to potential testimony that discuss the 4 scope, substance, subject matter or direction of the criminal investigation are properly redacted. 5 References to the fact that testimony may result in assertion of the Fifth Amendment right not to 6 incriminate oneself are not properly redacted. 7 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that RES and Leonardo must refile the redacted versions of 8 the Emergency Motion to Stay this Action at ECF No. 85 and Motion to Seal at ECF No. 87 9 removing redactions merely mentioning the fact of an ongoing criminal investigation. All redactions 10 referencing the scope, substance, subject matter or direction of the investigation are and shall remain 11 sealed. 12 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that RES and Leonardo’s Motion to Seal Wiedemer’s Motion 13 to Stay (ECF No. 90) is GRANTED to the extent that Wiedemer and RES/Leonardo must work 14 cooperatively to file a redacted version of Wiedemer’s Motion removing from public disclosure any 15 reference to the scope, substance, subject matter or direction of the investigation at issue. 16 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court must immediately seal the Motion to 17 Stay filed at ECF No. 89. 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that nothing in this Order changes the due dates for responses 19 or replies to pending substantive motions. 20 DATED this 6th day of December, 2023.

22 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27