UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

HUNTINGTON DIVISION

RASHEED T. LATHAM,

Movant,

v. Case No. 3:17-cv-03998 Case No. 3:15-cr-00145-03

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER SEALING DOCUMENT

Pending is Respondent’s Motion to Seal, (ECF No. 301), requesting to file under seal, its Response and all exhibits attached thereto. According to Respondent, the Response and attached exhibits contain sensitive information, which has been designated as confidential by Respondent. Due to the highly sensitive nature of the Response and attached exhibits, the Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that Respondent’s Response and all exhibits attached thereto be filed as SEALED. The undersigned is cognizant of the well-established Fourth Circuit precedent recognizing a presumption in favor of public access to judicial records. Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc.,

(4th Cir. 2000). As stated in Ashcraft, before sealing a document, the Court must follow a three step process: (1) provide public notice of the request to seal; (2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the document; and (3) provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting alternatives.

. In this case, the attached document shall be sealed and will be designated as sealed on the Court's docket. The Court deems this sufficient notice to interested members of the public. The Court has considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the Response and attached exhibits, but no alternatives to sealing the document are feasible. Moreover, the public’s right to be informed is greatly outweighed by the interests to be protected in this circumstance. Accordingly, the Court finds that sealing Respondent’s Response and the attached exhibits does not unduly prejudice the public’s right to access court documents. The Clerk is instructed to provide a copy of this Order to the Movant and all counsel of record. ENTERED: January 8, 2018

Chey Eifert U Ce Magistrate Judge