Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 6, 2021

Doe v. Decker

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:21-cv-05257
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureImmigrationHabeas
In one sentence

In Doe v. Decker, Judge Schofield directed the parties to identify docket numbers that should remain sealed in an immigration case.

Who this affects

John Doe, the government, and the attorneys identified as needing access to the sealed documents; the order concerns access to filings containing medical information.

What happened

John Doe v. Decker et al. is an immigration case in which the government asked to file two declarations and medical records under seal. The government said the records contained private medical information, and the petitioner’s counsel consented.

The government also said it would file redacted versions of its response, legal memorandum, declaration, and exhibits, along with unredacted versions under seal. The filing included a list of counsel who should have access to the sealed documents.

Judge Lorna G. Schofield directed the parties to specify which docket numbers should remain under seal by October 12, 2021. The order does not otherwise state that the sealing request was granted or denied.

The detailed version

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

Case
Doe v. Decker · No. 1:21-cv-05257
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Oct. 6, 2021

Background

The government described the matter as an immigration petition for a writ of habeas corpus, meaning a request concerning the legality of a person’s detention. The government asked permission to file two declarations under seal because they concerned John Doe’s medical diagnoses and treatment and included medical records from the detention facility. John Doe’s counsel consented to that request.

The government also stated that it would file redacted versions of its return, memorandum opposing the petition, a declaration by Deportation Officer Naquan Bacchus, and their exhibits. It said it would file unredacted versions of those documents under seal. The government argued that sealing was appropriate because of the privacy interests associated with medical records and cited decisions discussing court-access rules and medical-record confidentiality.

Ruling

The order states: “The parties are directed to specify which docket numbers should remain under seal by October 12, 2021.” It is signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield and dated October 6, 2021. The opinion text does not expressly say that the government’s request to seal was granted or denied; it directs the parties to identify the docket numbers that should remain sealed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.