Kinney v. Atlanticus Services Corporation

Background

The parties filed a joint motion about continued sealing of documents connected to Atlanticus Services Corporation’s motion for summary judgment. In an earlier order, the court had directed the parties either to file redacted documents or to explain why the documents should remain sealed. The parties then agreed that all but one of the documents could be unsealed.

The remaining document was the meet-and-confer statement filed at ECF No. 28. The court had previously kept that document sealed because it contained statements that might be understood as confidential settlement communications covered by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 408.

Legal standard

The court explained that civil-case documents may be sealed only under a statute or rule, or with the court’s permission. Judicial records carry a common-law presumption of public access. When documents play an important role in the court’s decision-making, that presumption can be overcome only by compelling reasons for sealing them.

Analysis

The court found that the documents were connected to a dispositive motion and therefore were particularly valuable to people monitoring the federal courts. Based on the parties’ agreement and the court’s own review, it found that the documents should be unsealed except for the meet-and-confer statement. The court maintained the seal on that statement because it might contain confidential settlement communications.

Order

The court granted the parties’ Joint Motion Regarding Continued Sealing. It directed the Clerk of Court to:

1. Keep ECF No. 28 under seal; and 2. Unseal ECF Nos. 23, 25, 27, 27-1 through 27-33, 32, 33, 33-1, 38, 40, and 40-1 through 40-4 within 21 days under Local Rule 5.6(f).

The opinion refers to Judge Donovan Frank’s earlier summary-judgment ruling, but this sealing order was signed by Dulce J. Foster, United States Magistrate Judge.