Diaz v. Aviles-Ramos
- Rochon
- 1:24-cv-09340
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Diaz v. Aviles-Ramos, Judge Rochon granted defendants’ motion to seal exhibits containing minors’ personal information.
The plaintiffs, including the minor children represented in the case, and anyone seeking public access to the exhibits. The exhibits remain under seal to protect the student’s personal information.
What happened
In Diaz v. Aviles-Ramos, the defendants asked the court to remove or seal Exhibits A through I attached to the plaintiffs’ statement because the exhibits publicly disclosed personal information about a student, including an identification number, birth date, family name, and address.
The plaintiffs agreed to sealing the exhibits. The court noted that courts in the district have allowed similar records to be sealed to protect minor children’s privacy.
Judge Rochon granted the motion to seal and directed the Clerk of Court to keep the plaintiffs’ filing under seal.
The detailed version
- Diaz v. Aviles-Ramos · No. 1:24-cv-09340
- Rochon
- May 9, 2025
Background
The defendants submitted a May 2, 2025 letter asking the court to seal Exhibits A through I attached to the plaintiffs’ statement responding to undisputed facts. The court treated that letter as a motion to seal. The defendants also asked the court to strike the documents from the public docket.
The exhibits contained unredacted personally identifying information about a student, including the student’s identification or organizational student information system number, date of birth, family name, and address. The plaintiffs filed a letter consenting to the sealing of the exhibits.
Ruling
The court stated that courts in the Southern District of New York have routinely allowed administrative records underlying cases involving the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to be filed under seal to protect minor child plaintiffs’ privacy. Judge Rochon granted the motion to seal. The Clerk of Court was directed to maintain docket entry 29 under seal.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.