Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01740/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01740-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 448
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights - Education
Cause of Action: 20:1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child

---

1

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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

This action is brought under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act whereby the child 

claims the defendant denied him/her a fair and appropriate education. The child seeks review of an 

administrative decision unfavorable to his/her position.

Plaintiff seeks to file the administrative record under seal. (Doc. 15) The child’s concern is 

that he/she and the child’s parents are entitled to privacy related to the issues raised in the case and 

specifically point to documents included in the record, such as mental and physical health evaluations, 

which, generally, are confidential under law. The child argues that redacting the child’s name and 

other identifiers would not workable because the record is about 2,300 pages. (Doc. 18)

The request to seal documents is controlled by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The 

Rule permits the Court to issue orders to “protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, 

oppression, or undue burden or expense, including . . . requiring that a trade secret or other 

N.G.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

TEHACHAPI UNIFIED SCHOOL 

DISTRICT,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01740 LJO JLT 

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO SEAL THE 

ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

(Docs. 15, 18)

Case 1:15-cv-01740-LJO-JLT Document 19 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 3
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

27

28

confidential research, development, or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in 

a specified way.” Only if good cause exists may the Court seal the information from public view after 

balancing “the needs for discovery against the need for confidentiality.’” Pintos v. Pac. Creditors 

Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. Cal. 2010) (quoting Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors 

Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2002)).

Presumptively, documents filed in civil cases are to be available to the public. EEOC v. 

Erection Co., 900 F.2d 168, 170 (9th Cir. 1990); see also Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 

447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.2006); Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1134 (9th 

Cir.2003). The Court may seal documents only when the compelling reasons for doing so outweigh 

the public’s right of access. EEOC at 170. In evaluating the request, the Court considers the “public 

interest in understanding the judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in 

improper use of the material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets.” 

Valley Broadcasting Co. v. United States District Court, 798 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1986).

As noted above, Plaintiff seeks to seal documents that list the child’s name and other 

identifiers. Brief review of the record indicates that it is peppered throughout with personal identifiers 

that would make redaction unwieldy. Likewise, the information contained in the record is highly 

sensitive and is deserving of confidentiality. Moreover, the defendant has indicated it has no objection 

to filing the record under seal.1Thus, the Court finds a compelling need for this information to remain 

private.

ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS:

1. Plaintiff’s request to seal (Doc. 15) is GRANTED;

///

///

 

1 Counsel are advised that this order does not preclude the Court from issuing orders on the public docket which discusses 

information contained in the sealed administrative record. On the other hand, the Court may issue orders under seal 

temporarily and give the parties an opportunity to recommend redactions for the public version of the order. In this event, 

failing to recommend redactions may result in the Court docketing the full order, which would open the confidential 

information public review.

Case 1:15-cv-01740-LJO-JLT Document 19 Filed 04/25/16 Page 2 of 3
3

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

27

28

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to file the administrative record under SEAL.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 25, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01740-LJO-JLT Document 19 Filed 04/25/16 Page 3 of 3