Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California denied without prejudice Plaintiff Colton James Rood’s motion to file two inmate declarations under seal. The court held that the motion did not provide specific reasons, authority, duration, access information, or document-by-document justification sufficient to overcome the presumption of public access, and ordered the Clerk to return the documents to Plaintiff.
Holdings
- Plaintiff failed to overcome the presumption of public access or otherwise demonstrate good cause for sealing the declarations because he did not articulate specific reasons supporting the sealing of each document and did not provide the information required by Local Rule 141(b).
- The court would not serve as a repository for evidence improperly submitted before it was needed in connection with a motion for summary judgment, trial, or a court request, and the Clerk was ordered to return the documents to Plaintiff.
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff established sufficient grounds under the applicable public-access and sealing standards to file two inmate declarations under seal.
- Whether the court should accept and retain the declarations as evidence before they were submitted in connection with a motion for summary judgment, trial, or at the court's request.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)(followed)
- Foltz v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…