White v. Keesler Federal Credit Union

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORT THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

EUGENIA WHITE PLAINTIFF

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:21-cv-190-TBM-RPM

KEESLER FEDERAL CREDIT UNION DEFENDANT

ORDER Now before the Court is the Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal and to Strike [37] certain documents attached to the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [31]. The Plaintiff specifically seeks to seal documents [31-3], [31-4], and [31-5] as they include the Plaintiff’s social security number. Because “the working presumption is that judicial records should not be sealed,” however, the Court finds that allowing the Defendant to file redacted copies of these documents would be more appropriate. Binh Hoa Le v. Exeter Finance Corp., 990 F.3d 410, 418-20 (5th Cir. 2021). Accordingly, the Defendant is instructed to contact the Clerk’s Office this same day for instructions on replacing documents [31- 3], [31-4], and [31-5] with redacted copies. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal [37] documents [31-3], [31-4], and [31-5] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike [37] documents [31-21] and [31-24] pursuant to Rule 37(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. This, the 17th day of February, 2023.

___________________________ TAYLOR B. McNEEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE