Nock v. Spring Energy RRH, LLC

Background

Robert Nock moved for contempt sanctions against NSL Marketing, LLC and Neil St. Louis. Spring Energy RRH, LLC, RRH Energy Services, LLC, and Richmond Road Holdings, LLC had designated two exhibits used during St. Louis’s deposition, and portions of the deposition transcript concerning those exhibits, as confidential under a stipulated protective order. Nock’s counsel submitted an unredacted motion and supporting materials and sought to seal them.

The exhibits concerned consumers enrolled with Defendants. Nock said the exhibits could bear on the extent of NSL’s involvement in Defendants’ marketing, the accuracy of St. Louis’s testimony, the completeness of his document production, and whether NSL should be held in contempt. Nock argued that only the consumers’ personal contact information needed redaction. The materials also contained telephone numbers, email addresses, service addresses, and contract rates.

Legal Standard

The court applied the public-access right for “judicial documents”—documents filed with the court that are relevant to its judicial function and useful in the judicial process. Materials filed in support of a contempt motion qualify as judicial documents. In deciding whether to seal material, the court weighs the material’s role in the exercise of federal judicial power and its value to people monitoring the federal courts against competing interests, including the privacy interests of people resisting disclosure.

Ruling

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger ordered: “The motion to seal is granted solely as to personal contact information of consumers.” The opinion text does not state that the court granted sealing for the consumers’ contract rates or for the other materials more generally. The order therefore granted the sealing request only to the extent stated in the order.