Opinion
No. 2:12-cr-00255-GEB
02-08-2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LYNN FERRELL SMITH, Defendant.
ORDER AUTHORIZING SEALING GOVERNMENT'S LETTER FOR DOWNWARD DEPARTURE AND DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO SEAL DOCUMENTS
On February 4, 2016, Defendant filed a "Notice of Request to Seal Document(s)" (the "Request"), (ECF No. 133), in which he states in part that the following document should be sealed: "Requests to Seal Document (To Be Filed Under Seal)" (the "Document"). The Request does not explain that the Document consists of Defendant's sealing argument and case authority. Rule 141(b) contemplates that the public docket concerning whatever is given to the judge for an in camera sealing request "provide[s the public] a kind of index to . . . [the] documents, . . . [so as to] endow the public and press with the capacity to exercise their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment." Hartford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83, 93 (2d Cir. 2004).
Defendant also requests that "[a]ccess to the sealed document . . . be limited to the government and counsel for the [D]efendant," (ECF No. 133-1 at 2), and Defendant asserts in the Document that since the publicly-filed Request was filed six weeks before the requested hearing date on the Motion to Reduce, (ECF No. 132), the notice gives potentially interested parties reasonable opportunity to object.
The proponent of a sealing order must articulate "the reasons supporting [sealing] . . . in [proposed] findings." Oregonian Publ'g Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for Dist. of Or., 920 F.2d 1462, 1466 (9th Cir. 1990); see Unabom Trial Media Coal, v. U.S. Dist. Court for E. Dist. of Cal. (Sacramento), 183 F.3d 949, 951 (9th Cir. 1999) (stating "the court articulates specific factual findings supporting closure"). Defendant states in the Request that the basis of the sealing request is the "nature of the information" sought to be sealed. (ECF No. 133 at 1.) Although this conclusory stated basis is questionable, Defendant's request is granted.
Access to the sealed documents shall be limited to the government and counsel for Defendant.
Further, the Clerk of Court shall cease treating this case as closed until after decision is rendered on Defendant's motion to reduce sentence that was filed on February 4, 2016. Dated: February 8, 2016
/s/_________
GARLAND E. BUREELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge