Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Miguel Ilaw, An Individual v. Daughters of Charity

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


July 9, 2012

MIGUEL ILAW, AN INDIVIDUAL,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
DAUGHTERS OF CHARITY HEALTH SYSTEM, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge United States District Court

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE REQUEST TO SEAL RECORDS (re: dkt. # 67)

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

Plaintiff Miguel Ilaw's ("Plaintiff") action was dismissed with prejudice on February 6, 2012. See ECF No. 55. On March 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Request to Seal Records ("Sealing 19 Motion") pursuant to: (1) the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(1)(A)-(D); (2) the Privacy 20 Rule of 2006, 42 U.S.C. § 1320d; and (3) the Freedom of Information Act of 1966, 5 U.S.C. § 552 21 No. 6. See ECF No. 67. In his Sealing Motion, Plaintiff asks the Court to "seal records effective 22 immediately, [sic] all his pleadings under this civil action involving protected health information." 23 Id. at 1.

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5, "no document may be filed under seal, i.e., closed to 25 inspection by the public, except pursuant to a Court order that authorizes the sealing of the 26 particular document, or portions thereof." If Plaintiff seeks to have any portion of the public record 27 filed under seal, Plaintiff must file a narrowly tailored request identifying the specific document(s) 28 or portions thereof that are entitled to sealing, and must provide the basis for withholding the information from the public. See Civ. L.R. 79-5(a). Any such request must conform with Civil 2 Local Rule 79-5(b) or (c). Id. 3

Plaintiff's current Sealing Motion indiscriminately asks the Court to seal the entire record.

This request is overbroad. Absent a narrowly tailored request identifying specific portions of 5 specific documents that Plaintiff believes are entitled to protection from public disclosure, the 6 Court is unable to grant Plaintiff's request in its current form. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Sealing 7 Motion is DENIED without prejudice. Should Plaintiff wish to file an amended administrative 8 motion to seal, he shall do so within 14 days of the date of this Order. 9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

For the Northern District of California

20120709

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.