Heaven v. Boeing Commercial Airplanes

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ASHLEY DEAN HEAVEN, Plaintiff, 10 Case No. 2:21-cv-01047-RAJ v. 11 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES, Defendant.

15 This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion to seal. Dkt. # 3.

16 Plaintiff requests that the Court seal the case entirely.

17 “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a strong presumption in favor of access is the starting point.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted).

23 Generally, two standards govern the sealing of court records. Pintos v. Pac.

24 Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2010). A “compelling reasons” standard applies to most judicial records, including those attached to dispositive motions. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. On the other hand, a “good cause” standard applies to nondispositive motions. Pintos, 605 F.3d at 678.

1 Plaintiff’s sealing motion, measuring just one sentence long, does not attempt to meet either the compelling reasons or good cause standard. And, on this record, the Court finds no reason to seal the court records under either.

4 For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to seal.

5 Dkt. # 3. The Clerk is directed to unseal the docket in this matter.

7 DATED this 8th day of December, 2021.

A 9 The Honorable Richard A. Jones United States District Judge