Filed: Aug. 13, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 13, 2014
Summary: ORDER MAX O. COGBURN, Jr., District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the court on defendant's Motion to Seal. Such motion does not reference Local Criminal Rule 55.1, which applies to "Sealed Records and Public Access." While defendant states that his appeal of the detention Order contains sensitive information and should remain confidential, defendant does not direct the court's attention to any particular section of the motion that contains such information. The court has conducted an independ
Summary: ORDER MAX O. COGBURN, Jr., District Judge. THIS MATTER is before the court on defendant's Motion to Seal. Such motion does not reference Local Criminal Rule 55.1, which applies to "Sealed Records and Public Access." While defendant states that his appeal of the detention Order contains sensitive information and should remain confidential, defendant does not direct the court's attention to any particular section of the motion that contains such information. The court has conducted an independe..
More
ORDER
MAX O. COGBURN, Jr., District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the court on defendant's Motion to Seal. Such motion does not reference Local Criminal Rule 55.1, which applies to "Sealed Records and Public Access." While defendant states that his appeal of the detention Order contains sensitive information and should remain confidential, defendant does not direct the court's attention to any particular section of the motion that contains such information.
The court has conducted an independent review of the motion and has determined that paragraphs 1, 2, 7, 8, and 14 second (a)1 contain sensitive information that, while relevant to defendant's custody status, should be sealed. Further, the court has considered alternatives to sealing, such as redaction of those paragraphs, but finds that redaction would not fully protect the sensitive information. Finally, the court finds that this Order contains sufficient information concerning the nature of the pleading and the request so that an interested party could, if they desired, move the court to unseal the pleading without unnecessarily shifting the burden to the public or the press.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that defendant's Motion to Seal (#18) is GRANTED, and pleading (#17) is SEALED nunc pro tunc.
