Harper v. Trumbull

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PAUL ALLEN HARPER, Case No. 23-cv-02623-HSG 8 Plaintiff, ORDER SEALING DKT. NOS. 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17 AND 18 9 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18 10 PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL, 11 Defendant.

13 Pro se plaintiff has filed several documents that include what appear to be a retired U.S. magistrate judge’s home address. See Dkt. Nos. 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18.

15 Although there is a “strong presumption in favor of access” to court records, Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2 (e) provides that “[f]or good cause, the court may by order in a case: (1) require redaction of . . . information; or (2) limit or prohibit a nonparty’s remote electronic access to a document filed with the court.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(e). Here, public disclosure of this information is not necessary for the public to fully understand the nature of this dispute, and there are obvious security concerns created by public disclosure of a former judicial officer’s home address.

22 // 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 1 Accordingly, good cause appearing, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to seal Dkt.

2 Nos. 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, and 18 and to e-file the attached redacted versions of each document on the docket as standalone documents.!

4 IT IS SO ORDERED.

5 Dated: August 4, 2023 Aippuredb 3, Ad}.

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 7 United States District Judge

© = 17 Z 18 28 ' Dkt. Nos. 9-1, 16-1 and 17-1, which do not include the address, do not need to be sealed.