Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01038/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01038-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IRWIN DOUGLAS,

No. CIV S-09-1038 FCD EFB PS

Plaintiff,

vs.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY, et al., 

ORDER

Defendants.

___________________________/

This case is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule

302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On July 30, 2010, defendants filed a “Notice of Request

to Seal Documents” pursuant to Local Rule 141, seeking to file under seal a motion for summary

judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication, and the documents in support thereof. 

Dckt. No. 38. Defendants contend that the documents they seek to seal “are replete with

personal, private information relating to Plaintiff . . . , including information pertaining to the

criminal records that were previously sealed by the Superior Court for the County of

Sacramento,” but argue that unredacted versions of the documents should be considered by the

Court because “the personal information and information in the criminal file are directly at issue

in this civil action and particularly pertinent in order for the Court to decide Defendants’ Motion

for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication.” Id. 

////

Case 2:09-cv-01038-KJM-EFB Document 39 Filed 08/05/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

 In fact, defendants’ request to seal documents indicates that a redacted version of the

motion would be filed. Defs.’ Req. to Seal at 4.

2

 The redacted version of the motion need not be resubmitted to the Court or re-served

on plaintiff.

2

Although defendants contend that the Court should consider an unredacted version of

their motion for summary judgment/adjudication, they do not explain why a redacted version of

the motion could not be filed.1

 Although much of the motion may be subject to redaction,

defendants are directed to file a redacted version of their motion for summary

judgment/adjudication on the publicly available docket not later than August 12, 2010.2

Thereafter, the court will determine whether the unredacted version of the motion that has

already been provided to the Court and to plaintiff shall be filed under seal. 

SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 5, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-01038-KJM-EFB Document 39 Filed 08/05/10 Page 2 of 2