ORDER

JOHN C. COUGHENOUR, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant's motions to seal (Dkt. Nos. 43, 48) sentencing materials. Having thoroughly considered Defendant's motions and the relevant record, the Court hereby GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motions for the following reasons.

Upon a showing of "good cause," district courts may order documents attached to nondispositive motions to remain under seal. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) (stating district courts may issue orders "to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense" if "good cause" is shown). This rule provides an exception to the "strong presumption in favor of [public] access" to judicial records. Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (citing Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1135). Here, Defendant asks the Court to seal various exhibits related to his sentencing memorandum. (See Dkt. Nos. 43.) These exhibits contain non-public information that is of a sensitive nature. Having reviewed these materials, the Court finds that Defendant's confidentiality interest in this information outweighs the public's interest in general access to judicial records. Finding good cause, the Court GRANTS the motion to seal (Dkt. Nos. 43).

Defendant also asks the Court to seal his motion to strike a victim impact statement (Dkt. No. 48). Defendant's motion to seal is DENIED, as the information discussed in the motion to strike was discussed in detail at the public sentencing hearing. The Clerk is DIRECTED to maintain Defendant's exhibits to his sentencing memorandum (Dkt. Nos. 45, 45-1) under seal. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to unseal document number 49.