Doe 1 v. McAleenan
- Beth Freeman
- 5:18-cv-02349
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Doe 1 v. McAleenan, Judge Demarchi granted plaintiffs’ request to seal specified discovery materials while allowing later confidentiality challenges.
The order affected plaintiffs’ ability to seal specified portions of their discovery filings and preserved both parties’ ability to later challenge the confidentiality designations.
What happened
In Jane Doe 1, et al. v. Kevin K. McAleenan, et al., plaintiffs asked to seal parts of an attorney declaration and an exhibit filed with their motion to compel discovery and request sanctions. Defendants had labeled the material confidential but did not respond to the sealing request.
The court applied a lower standard requiring a specific showing of good cause because the underlying motion concerned discovery and sanctions, not the merits of the parties’ claims or defenses. It found good cause to seal the identities and contact information of law-enforcement individuals in Exhibit S and allowed sealing of specified lines on page 8 of Mariko Hirose’s declaration and all of Exhibit S.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted the administrative motion to file under seal. The order said the parties could later challenge the confidentiality designation of the sealed documents.
The detailed version
- Doe 1 v. McAleenan · No. 5:18-cv-02349
- Beth Freeman
- Oct. 8, 2019
Background
In connection with plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery and request sanctions, plaintiffs filed an administrative motion to seal portions of an attorney declaration and an exhibit. Defendants had designated the material confidential but did not file a response under the applicable local rule.
Legal standard
The court explained that judicial records generally carry a strong presumption of public access. But that presumption is weaker for materials connected to motions only tangentially related to the merits. Because the underlying motion sought discovery and sanctions rather than a decision on the parties’ claims or defenses, the court applied the “good cause” standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c).
Ruling
The court found good cause to seal the identities and contact information of law-enforcement individuals in Exhibit S. It also allowed plaintiffs to seal page 8, lines 9 and 13–14, of the Declaration of Mariko Hirose and the entire Exhibit S to that declaration. The court noted that it was not clear whether the information designated confidential was precisely the same as information published in a cited prior case.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted plaintiffs’ administrative motion to file the specified materials under seal. The order stated that the parties could later challenge the confidentiality designation of the sealed documents.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.