Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beasley

D. Nevada

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beasley

DecidedApril 21, 2022

Docket2:22-cv-00612

StatusUnknown

This text of Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beasley (Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beasley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beasley, (D. Nev. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Case No. 2:22-cv-00612-JCM-EJY COMMISSION, 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v. 7 MATTHEW WAGE BEASLEY, et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 Pending before the Court is Defendant Shane Jager’s Motion for Leave of Court to File 11 Accounting of Assets Under Seal. ECF No. 51. The Court has reviewed the Motion and the Exhibit 12 prior to issuing this Order. 13 As the party seeking to seal a judicial record, Defendant Jager must meet his burden of 14 overcoming the strong presumption in favor of access and public policies favoring disclosure. 15 Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that those 16 who seek to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high 17 threshold of showing that “compelling reasons” support secrecy). The mere fact that the production 18 of records may lead to a party’s embarrassment, incrimination or exposure to further litigation will 19 not alone compel the court to seal its records. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 20 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003). However, where a party seeks to seal documents attached to a non- 21 dispositive motion, the “public policies that support the right of access to dispositive motions … do 22 not apply with equal force ….” Kamakana, 417 F.3d at 1179 (citation omitted). 23 Here, Defendant Jager’s Motion to Seal seeks to provide information previously ordered by 24 the Court to be disclosed that is not, necessarily, related to a specific motion. The document to be 25 sealed contains personal financial information and description of property owned by Defendant and 26 his spouse. The Court finds that the sealing of the information from public view is proper in this 27 case. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Shane Jager’s Motion for Leave of 2 Court to File Accounting of Assets Under Seal (ECF No. 51) is GRANTED and pages 4 and 5 of 3 ECF No. 51 shall remain sealed. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Seal, ECF No. 51 at pages 1 through 3, shall 5 be unsealed. 6 Dated this 21st day of April, 2022. 7

8 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Case No. 2:22-cv-00612-JCM-EJY COMMISSION, 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v. 7 MATTHEW WAGE BEASLEY, et al., 8 Defendants. 9 10 Pending before the Court is Defendant Shane Jager’s Motion for Leave of Court to File 11 Accounting of Assets Under Seal. ECF No. 51. The Court has reviewed the Motion and the Exhibit 12 prior to issuing this Order. 13 As the party seeking to seal a judicial record, Defendant Jager must meet his burden of 14 overcoming the strong presumption in favor of access and public policies favoring disclosure. 15 Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that those 16 who seek to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high 17 threshold of showing that “compelling reasons” support secrecy). The mere fact that the production 18 of records may lead to a party’s embarrassment, incrimination or exposure to further litigation will 19 not alone compel the court to seal its records. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 20 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003). However, where a party seeks to seal documents attached to a non- 21 dispositive motion, the “public policies that support the right of access to dispositive motions … do 22 not apply with equal force ….” Kamakana, 417 F.3d at 1179 (citation omitted). 23 Here, Defendant Jager’s Motion to Seal seeks to provide information previously ordered by 24 the Court to be disclosed that is not, necessarily, related to a specific motion. The document to be 25 sealed contains personal financial information and description of property owned by Defendant and 26 his spouse. The Court finds that the sealing of the information from public view is proper in this 27 case. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Shane Jager’s Motion for Leave of 2 Court to File Accounting of Assets Under Seal (ECF No. 51) is GRANTED and pages 4 and 5 of 3 ECF No. 51 shall remain sealed. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Seal, ECF No. 51 at pages 1 through 3, shall 5 be unsealed. 6 Dated this 21st day of April, 2022. 7

8 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beasley, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/securities-and-exchange-commission-v-beasley-nvd-2022.