(PS) Schmitz v. Asman

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THOMAS SCHMITZ, et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00195-JAM-CKD (PS) Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ 13 MOTION TO REDACT PROOFS OF v. SERVICE A. ASMAN, et al., 16 Defendants.

18 Defendants Asman, Bradley, Brunkhorst, Burns, and Lizarraga (“Defendants”) move to redact their home addresses from the proofs of service previously filed with the Court (ECF No. 13 at 14, 16; ECF No. 15; ECF No. 16).

21 After full consideration, and good cause appearing, the Court grants Defendants’ motion.

22 Defendants are peace officers, and disclosure of their home addresses violates the public policy of confidentiality, and jeopardizes Defendants’ safety and security. Hackett v. Superior Court, 13 24 Cal.App.4th 96, 100 (1993); Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). Further, defendants have represented that they contacted the plaintiffs who have no objection to this request.

27 //// //// wOAIe 6 OU VEY EY NS INES MUO OI ee OY ee 1 The Clerk is instructed to redact Defendants’ addresses from following proofs of service: | Docket No. 13 at pages 14 and 16, Docket No. 15, and Docket No. 16.

4 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 29, 2020 es rd ee (o 7 CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE