UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

____________________________________

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 1:04-cv-00798 (PLF)

)

ALL ASSETS HELD AT BANK JULIUS, )

Baer & Company, Ltd., Guernsey )

Branch, account number 121128, in the )

Name of Pavlo Lazarenko et al., )

)

Defendants In Rem. )

___________________________________ )

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Claimant Pavel Lazarenko’s Motion For Leave 

to File Under Seal [Dkt. 513]. On September 29, 2015, the Court issued a Memorandum 

Opinion and Order [Dkt. 462] granting another motion for leave to file under seal in this case 

subject to, inter alia, the following three conditions:

1. If the Court grants a motion for leave to file under seal any documents of 

any nature, including motions and briefs, that contain confidential material, the party filing the 

sealed document shall also file on the public record a copy of the document in which the 

confidential material is redacted within five business days of the filing of the sealed document.

2. Redactions to public copies of documents shall be made solely to the 

extent necessary to preserve the confidentiality of the relevant information and in accordance 

with the principles set forth in this Memorandum Opinion and Order.
2

3. Alternatively, if—and only if—the redactions are so extensive as to render 

a particular document useless to the reader, the party shall file on the public record a notice of 

the filing of the document under seal in its entirety.

The Court set those conditions with respect to the motion then under 

consideration because sealed court proceedings are inconsistent with “this country's strong 

tradition of access to judicial proceedings.” United States v. Hubbard, 650 F.2d 293, 317 n. 89 

(D.C. Cir. 1980). The Court explained that, as a general rule, the courts are not intended to be, 

nor should they be, secretive places for the resolution of secret disputes. See, e.g., Nixon v. 

Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978) (“It is clear that the courts of this 

country recognize a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including 

judicial records and documents.”). Finally, the Court noted that, given the policy in favor of 

public access, and the ease with which confidential and potentially confidential information may 

be redacted from documents before they are filed publicly, this case can and should be open to 

the public to the greatest extent possible. See Dkt. 462 at 1-2

Since issuing the September 29, 2015 Memorandum Opinion and Order, the 

parties have complied with its conditions in subsequent motions for leave to file under seal 

without the Court explicitly ordering them to do. See, e.g., Dkt. 470 at 2 (“In accordance with 

this Court’s September 29, 2015 Order (ECF No. 462), Plaintiff will file on the public record a 

copy of [its motion], in which the confidential material will be redacted, within five business 

days.”); Dkt. 503 at 2 (“Mr. Lazarenko will file a redacted version of [his motion] on PACER.”). 

The instant motion, however, contains no such language indicating compliance with the 

September 29, 2015 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Because the Court’s business is the 

public’s business, the Court will make compliance with the three conditions outlined above a 
3

requirement for the instant motion as well as for all subsequent motions for leave to file under

seal in this case.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that Claimant Pavel Lazarenko’s Motion For Leave to File Under 

Seal [Dkt. 513] is GRANTED; it is

FURTHER ORDERED that Claimant’s Supplemental Reply and Objection to 

Plaintiff’s Use of Claimant’s 2002 Proffer Statements [Dkt. 513-1], the Declaration of Ted W. 

Cassman [Dkt. 513-2], Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Ted W. Cassman [Dkt. 513-3], Exhibit 2 

to the Declaration of Ted W. Cassman [Dkt. 513-4], and Exhibit 3 to the Declaration of Ted W. 

Cassman [Dkt. 513-5] may be filed under seal and the Clerk of the Court is directed to docket 

them; it is

FURTHER ORDERED that within five business days Claimant shall file on the 

public record a copy of each of these documents in which he redacts confidential material and 

makes as few redactions as absolutely necessary; and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that all subsequent motions for leave to file under seal 

that either party may file in this case comply with the three conditions set forth in this 

Memorandum Opinion and Order.

SO ORDERED.

/s/________________________

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN

DATE: December 9, 2015 United States District Court