Whitall v. Gutierrez

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 RAYMOND RICHARD WHITALL, Case No. 18-cv-01376-CRB

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 10 v. FILE UNDER SEAL

11 J. CABALLERO, et al., 12 Defendants.

13 Defendants move to seal an Office of Internal Affairs investigation report relating to 14 the February 28, 2017 incident at the center of Whitall’s claims against Defendants. See 15 Mot. (dkt. 335). To justify sealing, Defendants must show that “compelling reasons 16 supported by specific factual findings” overcome “the general history of access and the 17 public policies favoring disclosure.” Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 18 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). To that end, they contend that the OIA 19 report should be sealed because it contains “OIA agents’ review and impressions of the 20 supporting documents and evidence of the alleged employee misconduct” and “identifying 21 information, such as OIA agents’ full names and confidential statements made by the 22 parties.” Mot. at 3. 23 These reasons do not warrant filing the full OIA report under seal. Defendants fail 24 to explain why “agents’ review and impressions” should be shielded from the public view, 25 citing only to “the impartiality of the investigative process” and “the integrity of the 26 department.” Id. These vague notions do not outweigh the “strong presumption in favor 27 of access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178. As for OIA agents’ identifying information, that 1 Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1137 (9th Cir. 2003) (reversing district court order sealing 2 entire document when “a small number of third-party medical and personnel records [] can 3 be redacted with minimal effort”); Civ. L.R. 79-5(a) (“A party must … avoid wherever 4 possible sealing entire documents (as opposed to merely redacting the truly sensitive 5 information in a document).”). 6 Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to file the OIA report under 7 seal. This is without prejudice to a future motion to file a redacted copy of the OIA report 8 that redacts sensitive personal information contained therein. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 Dated: August 4, 2025 CHARLES R. BREYER 11 United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27