Burr v. Clark County

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * CHRISTOPHER BURR, individually and Case No. 2:20-cv-01101-JCM-EJY as adoptive parent and legal guardian of L.B., a minor; and SUAN HOY guardian ad litem for L.B., a minor, ORDER Plaintiff, v. CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES; COUNTY OF CLARK, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada; HEATHER MUMMEY, individually and in her official capacity; TIM BURCH, individually and in his official capacity; ROE CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES EMPLOYEES I through X, individually and in their official capacities; JONEL KAYE REPOLLO QUERRER, individually; DOES I through XX; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through XX, inclusive, Defendants.

17 Pending before the Court are Defendants’ Clark County and Heather Mummey’s Motion for Leave to File Exhibits in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal. ECF No. 74.

19 Specifically, Defendants seek to seal Exhibits A, C to Z, AA to MM, and OO to WW to their Motion for Summary Judgment.

21 Defendants describe each exhibit and provides the basis for their request. While courts have historically “recognized a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents” there are compelling reasons that overcome this right. Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). The court must weigh relevant factors including “the public interest in understanding the judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in improper use of the material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets.” Williams v. Nevada Dep’t of Corr., 2014 WL 3734287, at *1 (D.

1 || The Court generally recognizes the need to protect medical privacy as a qualified “compellit || reason” for sealing records in connection with a dispositive motion. /d. citing, e.g., San Rame || Reg] Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Principal Life Ins. Co., 2011 WL 89931, at *1 n.1 (N.D. Cal. Jan.10, 2011 || Abbey v. Hawaii Emp’r Mut. Ins. Co.,2010 WL 4715793, at **1—2 (D. Haw. Nov.15, 2010); Wilki || v. Ahern, 2010 WL 3755654, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Sept.24, 2010); Lombardi v. Tri West Healthca || Alliance Corp., 2009 WL 1212170, at *1 (D.Ariz. May 4, 2009).

7 Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ for Leave to Fi || Exhibits in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal (ECF No. 74) is GRANTED.

9 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits A, C to Z, AA to MM, and OO to WW || Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment are and shall remain sealed.

11 Dated this 26th day of January, 2023.

13 FLAYNY) dhe 4 UNITED.STATES MAG TE JUDGE