United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2021

(PS) Pearson v. Icanotes-EHR

(PS) Pearson v. Icanotes-EHR
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided March 11, 2021
(PS) Pearson v. Icanotes-EHR

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NICOLE PEARSON, No. 2:20-cv-1720 KJM DB PS

Plaintiff, v. ORDER

ICANOTES-EHR, et al.,

Defendants,

Plaintiff Nicole Pearson is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On March 1, 2021, plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 13.)

Plaintiff also filed a request seeking an order sealing this action. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff’s request, however, does not make the necessary showing to justify sealing this action. See Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir. 2016) (party seeking to seal judicial records normally bears the burden of overcoming strong presumption in favor of public access by showing compelling reasons). Nonetheless, out of an abundance of caution, the undersigned will order that this action be un-filed. //// ////

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs March 1, 2021 request to seal (ECF No. 14) is denied; 2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to un-file and remove the complaint from the case; 3. Plaintiff has voluntarily dismissed this action; and 4. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case.

Dated: March 10, 2021

ORAH BARNES

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DLB:6

35 DB/orders/orders.pro se/pearson1720.unfile.ord

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.