United States v. Ochoa-Ochoa, 19cr2125WQH. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190919792
Visitors: 3
Filed: Sep. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 18, 2019
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM Q. HAYES , District Judge . The matter before this Court is the Motion to seal the motion in limine, the motion to seal and the order filed by the Plaintiff United States. Plaintiff United States requests that the Court file the materials under seal on the grounds that they was subject to a protective order entered by this Court and the publication of the motion could cause public embarrassment and touches on personnel matters. "A party seeking to seal a judicial record ... b
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM Q. HAYES , District Judge . The matter before this Court is the Motion to seal the motion in limine, the motion to seal and the order filed by the Plaintiff United States. Plaintiff United States requests that the Court file the materials under seal on the grounds that they was subject to a protective order entered by this Court and the publication of the motion could cause public embarrassment and touches on personnel matters. "A party seeking to seal a judicial record ... be..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM Q. HAYES, District Judge.
The matter before this Court is the Motion to seal the motion in limine, the motion to seal and the order filed by the Plaintiff United States. Plaintiff United States requests that the Court file the materials under seal on the grounds that they was subject to a protective order entered by this Court and the publication of the motion could cause public embarrassment and touches on personnel matters.
"A party seeking to seal a judicial record ... bears the burden of overcoming [a] strong presumption [in favor of public access] by meeting the compelling reasons standard." Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal citations and quotations omitted). A party seeking to seal court documents can overcome the presumed right to access "only by [establishing] an overriding right or interest `based on findings that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest.'" Oregonian Publ'g Co. v. U.S. Dist Court for the Dist. of Or., 920 F.2d 1462, 1465 (9th Cir. 1990) (quoting Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Ct., 464 U.S. 501, 510 (1985).
The Court has reviewed the materials and finds that the request to seal to information is not supported by compelling reasons for sealing. A substantial portion of the materials addresses facts relevant to evidence at trial which are not appropriate for filing under seal. The Protective Order in this case did not address whether the materials would remain sealed in support of a motion in limine. In addition, the materials do not relate to any current personnel investigation. The Court concludes that the motion to seal does not state grounds to overcome the presumption in favor of public access.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to seal is denied. The Clerk of the Court shall file the motion to seal and the motion in limine under seal in the record solely for the purposes of completing the record for appeal. The Clerk of the Court shall file this order on the public record.
Source: Leagle
