Guerrero Mariano v. Decker
- John Cronan
- 1:21-cv-04440
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Guerrero Mariano v. Decker, Judge Cronan granted the petitioner’s unopposed motion to file sensitive documents under seal.
The petitioner’s requested mental-health information, medical records, and U-visa-related documents will be filed under seal rather than made publicly accessible; the government did not oppose the request.
What happened
In Guerrero Mariano v. Decker, the petitioner asked to file certain documents supporting his amended petition for a court order challenging his detention under seal, meaning they would not be publicly available.
The requested documents included mental-health declarations, medical records for the petitioner and his mother, and documents previously submitted with the petitioner’s U-visa application. The government did not oppose the request.
Judge Cronan ruled that the petitioner’s privacy interests outweighed the usual public-access interest in court documents. The court therefore granted the unopposed motion to seal in a separately docketed order.
The detailed version
- Guerrero Mariano v. Decker · No. 1:21-cv-04440
- John Cronan
- June 4, 2021
Background
Keisy Guerrero Mariano, the petitioner, filed an unopposed motion for permission to file certain documents under seal in support of an amended petition for a court order challenging his detention. The motion relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.
Documents at Issue
The documents included declarations from a psychologist and a social worker concerning the petitioner’s mental health and psychiatric functioning while in detention and his past traumatic experiences. They also included medical records for the petitioner and his mother, as well as two documents previously submitted in support of the petitioner’s U-visa application as a crime victim.
Court’s Ruling
The court concluded that the petitioner’s privacy interests outweighed the presumption of public access to the documents. The court therefore granted the petitioner’s unopposed motion to seal in a separately docketed order. The opinion cited Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga for the public-access standard.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.