Dominguez v. City Of San Jose

Background

This civil-rights action concerns the alleged shooting of Jacob Dominguez by Officer Michael Pina on September 15, 2017, which resulted in Mr. Dominguez’s death. Jessica Dominguez brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and two California statutes, individually and as guardian ad litem for herself and Mr. Dominguez’s minor children. The parties had filed cross-motions for summary judgment that were not yet fully briefed.

In support of their summary-judgment motion, the plaintiffs submitted a San Jose Police Department internal-affairs video interview with Officer Pina. The defendants had designated the video “Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under a stipulated protective order. The plaintiffs asked to file the video publicly, arguing that the public interest in access outweighed any interest in sealing it.

Sealing Issue

The defendants provided evidence that Officer Pina had received death threats on social media and that there had been vandalism at the location involved in the incident. They argued that keeping images of Officer Pina from public access would reduce the ability of people who wished to harm him to identify and target him. They also submitted two portions of the video with his face blurred, arguing that those excerpts would allow the public to see his movements and hear his description of the incident while protecting his safety. The plaintiffs agreed that only those two blurred-face portions needed to be filed publicly.

For judicial records connected to dispositive motions, the court applied the strong presumption of public access and required compelling reasons to justify sealing. The court also considered whether the sealing arrangement was narrowly tailored and whether a less restrictive alternative was sufficient.

Ruling

The court agreed that protecting Officer Pina’s safety in light of the death threats was a compelling reason to seal the full video. It granted the defendants’ request that Exhibit 10 to the plaintiffs’ summary-judgment motion remain under seal. The court directed that Exhibits E and F to the Declaration of Maren J. Clouse at ECF No. 57-2 were the only portions of the video that could be shown publicly. This order addressed the video’s filing and public access, not the merits of the underlying civil-rights claims or the pending summary-judgment motions.