McAndie v. Sequim School District

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE HANNA J. McANDIE, CASE NO. 3:21-cv-05227-JHC Plaintiff, ORDER v. SEQUIM SCHOOL DISTRICT, ROBERT CLARK, and his marital community, 12 Defendants.

14 On March 3, 2023, the Court issued under seal an order (1) granting in part and denying in part SSD’s motion for summary judgment, and (2) granting in part, denying in part, and denying without prejudice in part Clark’s motion for summary judgment. See Dkt. # 156. The Court filed the order under seal in recognition of the fact that the order references confidential or sensitive evidence that the parties submitted under seal, see Dkts. ## 94-1, 94-2, but that does not necessarily mean that the cited portions of this evidence included in the order must remain sealed. There is a “strong presumption in favor of access to court records.” Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). The Court wants to know whether the sealed evidence referenced in the order is sensitive enough to warrant protection from public disclosure.

1 Each party is DIRECTED to file a brief, within five (5) court days, identifying any || portions of the summary judgment order, if any, that the party believes should be redacted in a public version of the order. Each brief may be filed under seal and shall not exceed five (5) 4 ||pages. The brief must include specific argument about each proposed redaction.

5 Dated this 3rd day of March, 2023. ° Cok. 4. Chur 7 John H. Chun United States District Judge 1]