Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 21, 2020

Dov v. Bureau of Prisons

Judge
Sarah Cave
Docket
1:20-cv-09370
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureHabeas
In one sentence

In Dov v. Bureau of Prisons, Judge Cave granted the government’s request to seal medical records and directed closure of ECF No. 13.

Who this affects

The petitioner’s medical records filed in the case were maintained under seal, and ECF No. 13 was closed. The order also affected the government’s filing request.

What happened

In Dov v. Bureau of Prisons, the government asked to file the petitioner’s Bureau of Prisons medical records under seal, limiting public access to those records.

The court granted the request to maintain ECF No. 14 under seal as accessible only to the selected, and directed the Clerk of Court to close ECF No. 13.

Judge Sarah L. Cave entered this order on December 21, 2020. The order addressed sealing and docket administration, not the underlying habeas matter.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dov v. Bureau of Prisons · No. 1:20-cv-09370
Judge
Sarah Cave
Date
Dec. 21, 2020

Background

The government, through the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, asked the court for permission to file the petitioner’s medical records from the Bureau of Prisons under seal. The government argued that sealing was appropriate because of the privacy interests associated with medical records. The request referred to the presumption that court filings are publicly accessible and cited decisions discussing the confidentiality of medical records.

Ruling

The court granted the defendant’s request to maintain ECF No. 14 under seal as accessible only to the selected. The Clerk of Court was directed to close ECF No. 13.

Effect of the Order

This was a sealing and docket-management order in a habeas matter. The opinion text does not decide the underlying habeas claim or describe any ruling on the petitioner’s medical condition or confinement.

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.