District Court, D. Nevada, 2021

Vontress v. State of Nevada

Vontress v. State of Nevada
District Court, D. Nevada · Decided December 8, 2021
Vontress v. State of Nevada

Trial Court Opinion

Jacob B. Lee

Nevada Bar No. 012428

Jamie D. Guzman

Arizona Bar No. 022095 (admitted pro hac vice)

STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO, PLC

3100 West Ray Road, Suite 300

Chandler, Arizona 85226

Telephone: (480) 420-1600

Fax: (480) 420-1695

[email protected]

[email protected]

Gina G. Winspear

Nevada Bar No. 005552

DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP

3301 North Buffalo Drive, Suite 195

Las Vegas, Nevada 89129

Telephone: (702) 839-1100

Fax: (702) 839-1113

[email protected]

Attorneys for Defendants Thomas,

Fuller, Williams, and CoreCivic

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

GEORGE L. VONTRESS, Case No. 2:18-cv-01746-RFB-BNW Plaintiff, CORECIVIC DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE

REGARDING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO v. FILE UNDER SEAL

STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,

Defendants.

Pursuant to the Court’s Orders (ECF Nos. 298, 301), Defendants Thomas, Fuller, Williams, and CoreCivic (collectively, “CoreCivic Defendants”), through counsel, respond in connection with their Motion to Seal Exhibit 4 of their Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 270).

The CoreCivic Defendants requested to file Exhibit 4 of their Motion for Summary Judgment under seal because it exclusively contains Plaintiff’s medical and mental health records.

(ECF No. 270.) The CoreCivic Defendants did so in due diligence to any obligations to safeguard such information pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”). Defendants also sought to protect, to the extent possible, Plaintiff’s sensitive and private medical information from public exposure and to avoid potential security risks to Plaintiff that having such information available in the public domain poses while he is still in a secure prison environment (such as, for example, another inmate learning Plaintiff’s medical history and using it to intimidate, threaten, or coerce Plaintiff).

The Court denied the CoreCivic Defendants’ motion to seal and ordered that, if Defendants wished to renew the motion, it must be filed by July 19, 2021, or the exhibit would be unsealed. (ECF No. 298.) Because the Court noted that Plaintiff has put his medical condition and medical care at issue in this case and that the majority of the records are related to the central issue in this case, the CoreCivic Defendants did not renew their motion.

Chester v. King, 2019 WL 5420213 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2019), cited by the Court, appears to be on-point. There, the defendants moved to seal medical records attached to their motion for summary judgment that had been designated as “confidential” under the protective order in place. Although the district court recognized that “[t]his court, and others within the Ninth Circuit, have recognized that the need to protect medical privacy qualifies as a ‘compelling reason’ for sealing records,” it nevertheless found that the defendants failed to show compelling reasons to seal the particular records at issue, which the court considered to be relevant to the claims in the case. The situation here is nearly identical. Plaintiff’s claims against the CoreCivic Defendants are for deliberate indifference to medical needs. In their Motion for Summary Judgment, the CoreCivic Defendants argued that Plaintiff received a comprehensive umbrella of medical and mental health care at CoreCivic’s Saguaro Correctional Center, such that Plaintiff cannot prove that they were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs.1 (ECF No. 269 at 15–25.) The CoreCivic Highly security-sensitive information such as dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and staff first names in Exhibit 4 to the Motion for Summary Judgment have been redacted. First names of correctional personnel are security-sensitive, privacy-protected information to which detainees at CoreCivic’s facilities are not privy, and which are not divulged to current or former detainees in order to protect the employees’ privacy and security. For example, first names do not appear on correctional officer name badges. Putting staff members’ full names on the public docket, where they can be seen by current and former inmates, many of whom are verified members of criminal gangs, would endanger not only staff members, but their families as well. The potential safety risks if staff members’ full names become public record in this matter outweigh the need for the public’s Defendants moved for leave to file Plaintiff's medical records under seal to protect his medical privacy and avoid any potential HIPAA violations. Redactions to “non-relevant” information could not be satisfactorily made, however, as Plaintiffs entire record of care is related to the central issues in Plaintiffs Complaint.

For these reasons, the CoreCivic Defendants did not renew their Motion for Leave to File Under Seal. The CoreCivic Defendants defer to the Court’s discretion whether Exhibit 4 should be =| unsealed.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 12 day of August, 2021.

STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO, PLC By /s/ Jamie D. Guzman

Jacob B. Lee

Jamie D. Guzman

3100 West Ray Road, Suite 300

Chandler, Arizona 85226

JLee @strucklove.com

JGuzman @ strucklove.com

Gina G. Winspear

DENNETT WINSPEAR

3301 North Buffalo Dr., Suite 195 Las Vegas, NV 89129

GWinspear @ dennettwinspear.com Attorneys for Defendants Thomas, Fuller, Williams, and CoreCivic

Order

Having reviewed ECF No. 304, IT

IS ORDERED that the Clerk of

Court shall unseal ECF No. 271. nem. sot on ecumer 08, 2021 gn be we boy

BRENDA WES gar JUDGE

—WwdJ—_ access to that information. (See, e.g., Doc. 137, Freitas v. Thomas, No. CV-13-01364-PHX-SRB (ESW), United States District Court, District of Arizona, at 3.)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 12, 2021, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants:

Aaron D. Ford

Attorney General

Henry H. Kim (Bar No. 14390)

Deputy Attorney General

State of Nevada

Office of the Attorney General

555 E. Washington Ave., Ste. 3900

Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 486-3095 (phone) (702) 486-3773 (fax)

Email: [email protected]

Attorneys for Defendants

Frank Dreesen, James Dzurenda,

Dwight Neven, and Rene Pena

I hereby certify that on this same date, I served the attached document by U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, on the following, who is not a registered participant of the CM/ECF System: George Vontress (NDOC #96499)

High Desert State Prison (HDSP)

P.O. Box 650

Indian Springs, Nevada 89070-0650

Plaintiff Pro Se /s/ Jamie D. Guzman

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