Roe v. Marshall University Board of Governors

• Court: District Court, S.D. West Virginia
• Decided: January 16, 2024
• Docket: 3:22-cv-00532
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

HUNTINGTON DIVISION JANE ROE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 3:22-cv-00532

MARSHALL UNIVERISTY BOARD OF GOVERNORS,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF RECORDS OF PLAINTIFF FROM OASIS BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS

Pending before the Court is Defendant Marshall University Board of Governors’ Motion to File Under Seal, (ECF No. 108), seeking to seal Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Records of Plaintiff from Oasis Behavioral Health Services and attached Exhibits. The Court notes that the Motion to Compel contains information that has been designated by the parties to this litigation as “confidential.” Due to the confidential nature of this information, and due to the fact that this information is currently being used and disclosed only for purposes of discovery in this action, this Court GRANTS Defendant Marshall University Board of Governors’ Motion to File Under Seal and ORDERS the Clerk to file Defendant Marshall University Board of Governors’ Motion to Compel Production of Records of Plaintiff from Oasis Behavioral Health Services and Exhibits, (ECF No. 108-1 through ECF No. 108-2), under seal. The Motion to Seal itself, (ECF No. 108), should not be sealed. The undersigned is cognizant of the well-established Fourth Circuit precedent recognizing a presumption in favor of public access to judicial records. Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288 (4th Cir. 2000). As stated in Ashcraft, before sealing a document, the Court must follow a three-step process: (1) provide public notice of the request to seal; (2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the document; and (3)

provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting alternatives. Id. at 302. In this case, Defendant Marshall University Board of Governors’ Motion to Compel and attached Exhibits shall be sealed and will be designated as sealed on the Court’s docket. The Court deems this sufficient notice to interested members of the public. The Court has considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, but in view of the nature of the information set forth in the documents—which is information disclosed and used in the discovery process and generally protected from public release—alternatives to wholesale sealing are not feasible at this time. Moreover, the information provided in the Motion and attached Exhibits are submitted to the Court for the purpose of resolving a discovery dispute, rather than for disposition of substantive claims in this action.

Accordingly, the Court finds that sealing Defendant Marshall University Board of Governors’ Motion to Compel Production of Records of Plaintiff from Oasis Behavioral Health Services and attached Exhibits, does not unduly prejudice the public’s right to access court documents. The Clerk is DIRECTED to file Defendant Marshall University Board of Governors’ Motion to Compel Production of Records of Plaintiff from Oasis Behavioral Health Services and Exhibits, (ECF Nos. 108-1, 108-2), under seal. The Clerk is instructed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented parties. ENTERED: January 16, 2024

Chey Eifert U ates Magistrate Judge a“