Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 6, 2020

Bergrin v. United States of America

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:19-cv-09681
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Bergrin v. United States, Judge Broderick granted the United States’ request to seal exhibits containing an unrelated person’s sensitive information.

Who this affects

Ronald A. Bergrin, the United States, and the unrelated individual whose presentence investigation report and personal information appeared in the publicly filed exhibits.

What happened

In Bergrin v. United States of America, Ronald A. Bergrin publicly filed exhibits containing part of an unrelated person’s presentence investigation report, which included sensitive personal information.

The United States asked the court to seal the exhibits or, alternatively, require redacted versions that complied with the rule protecting personal identifiers in publicly filed documents. The United States stated that its letter did not waive service defects or constitute a general appearance.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the United States’ request to seal the specified documents. The order did not address the underlying allegations or claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Bergrin v. United States of America · No. 1:19-cv-09681
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Jan. 6, 2020

Background

Ronald A. Bergrin filed an amended complaint and attached part of a presentence investigation report concerning an individual unrelated to the case. The United States said the report was under seal in another federal court and contained sensitive personal information. The United States also stated that Bergrin had not served it and that the letter was submitted only to protect sensitive information, without waiving service defects or making a general appearance.

The Request

The United States asked the court to seal the documents docketed at Dkt. Nos. 7-5 at 71–72 and 7-6 at 1–2. It argued that presentence reports are generally confidential court documents and that the privacy interests of an innocent third party supported sealing. In the alternative, it asked the court to require Bergrin to file redacted copies complying with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, which requires redaction of certain personal identifiers in publicly filed documents.

Ruling

Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the United States’ request that the specified documents be filed under seal. The order did not rule on the merits of Bergrin’s allegations against members of the judiciary, the Department of Justice, or the Bureau of Prisons, and the supplied text does not state any separate ruling requiring redacted replacements.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.