Summary
This United States District Court order resolves the Plaintiff's Sealed Motion to Seal Documents in a civil action against the Clark County School District. Relying on Ninth Circuit precedent, the Court partially granted and partially denied the motion, ordering the unsealing of the motion itself and a cover sheet while keeping two video exhibits sealed. Plaintiffs are directed to file redacted versions of the unsealed materials on the public docket by April 25, 2025.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a motion to seal is properly sealable when it does not disclose the substantive information sought to be sealed.
- Whether the cover sheet identifying Exhibit 5 meets the Ninth Circuit sealing standard.
Holdings
- A motion to seal is not itself properly sealable unless the motion discloses the substantive information sought to be sealed.
- The cover sheet to Exhibit 5 does not meet the Ninth Circuit sealing standard and therefore must be unsealed.
Key quotations
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Seal Documents (ECF No. 23) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit 1 to the Motion (the cover sheet identifying Exhibit 5) is unsealed as is the Motion to Seal.”
Factual background
Plaintiffs sought to seal certain documents, including a video (Exhibit 5) and its cover sheet. The court examined whether the motion disclosed the substantive information sought to be sealed and whether the cover sheet met the Ninth Circuit's sealing standard as articulated in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu.
Procedural history
Plaintiffs filed a sealed Motion to Seal Documents (ECF No. 23). The district court reviewed the motion and the accompanying exhibits to determine whether the motion and the cover sheet identifying Exhibit 5 satisfy the Ninth Circuit sealing standard.
Remand instructions
Plaintiffs must refile the Motion to Seal and the cover sheet to Exhibit 5 on the publicly available docket no later than April 25, 2025.