YORMAK v. YORMAK, 2:14-cv-33-FtM-29CM. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20150508b47
Visitors: 27
Filed: May 07, 2015
Latest Update: May 07, 2015
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , District Judge . Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Steven Yormak's Motion to Partially Seal Plaintiff's Objection to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 183), filed on May 4, 2015. 1 Plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal portions of his Objection and exhibits that contain sensitive financial information protected by the parties' Confidentiality Order. 2 Doc. 91 at 8. The Court has reviewed the proposed filings and finds it appropriate for the docu
Summary: ORDER CAROL MIRANDO , District Judge . Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Steven Yormak's Motion to Partially Seal Plaintiff's Objection to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 183), filed on May 4, 2015. 1 Plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal portions of his Objection and exhibits that contain sensitive financial information protected by the parties' Confidentiality Order. 2 Doc. 91 at 8. The Court has reviewed the proposed filings and finds it appropriate for the docum..
More
ORDER
CAROL MIRANDO, District Judge.
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Steven Yormak's Motion to Partially Seal Plaintiff's Objection to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 183), filed on May 4, 2015.1 Plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal portions of his Objection and exhibits that contain sensitive financial information protected by the parties' Confidentiality Order.2 Doc. 91 at ¶ 8. The Court has reviewed the proposed filings and finds it appropriate for the documents to be filed under seal pursuant to the parties' Confidentiality Order.
ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby
ORDERED:
Plaintiff Steven Yormak's Motion to Partially Seal Plaintiff's Objection to Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 183) is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to file the unredacted documents under seal.
FootNotes
1. Plaintiff's prior motion for leave to file portions of his Objection under seal was denied without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 3.01(g). Doc. 175. After Plaintiff failed to re-file the motion to seal, or otherwise file objections to the Report and Recommendation, the Court entered an Order noting it was unclear whether Plaintiff intended to object to the Report and Recommendation and permitting Plaintiff additional time during which to do so. Doc. 182. Plaintiff's instant motion contains a Local Rule 3.01(g) certification that appears to state the motion is unopposed, although it is not entirely clear.
2. The only document that appears to contain redacted information is the Supplement to Expert Report of Heinz E. Ickert (Doc. 183-2).
Source: Leagle
