Opinion
CV-18-02347-PHX-MTL
08-16-2021
Johnny Wheatcroft, et al., Plaintiffs, v. City of Glendale, et al., Defendants.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
ORDER
Michael T. Liburdi United Stales District Judge
Before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Under Partial Seal Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 247), Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Non-Electronic Exhibits in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 248), Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Non-Electronic Exhibits in Support of Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 262), Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Under Partial Seal Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 268), and Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Exhibits in Support of Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal (Doc. 269). Neither Defendants nor Plaintiffs filed a response in opposition to any of these motions. The deadline to do so has expired.
The Court will first address the motions to seal. Defendants first seek leave to file portions of their Motion for Summary Judgment and their Reply under seal because the pleadings and certain exhibits contain sensitive information as to the minor Plaintiffs in this case and Plaintiff Johnny Wheatcroft's medical records. (Doc. 247 at 2; Doc. 268 at 1-2.) Because the Motion for Summary Judgment and Reply deal with a dispositive motion, Defendants “must meet the high threshold showing that ‘compelling reasons' support secrecy.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 2006). The Court finds that Defendants have met this standard. See J.N. v. Or. Dep't of Educ., No. 6:19-CV-00096, 2020 WL 589534, at *2 (D. Or. Feb. 5 2020) (finding the protection of a minor's identity outweighed the presumption in favor of public access to court records); A.C. v. City of Santa Clara, No. 13-CV-03276, 2015 WL 4076364, at *2 (N.D. Cal. July 2, 2015) (finding that the confidentiality concerns of medical records under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 outweighed the presumption in favor of public access to court records). The Court will therefore grant these two motions to seal (Docs. 247, 268).
Defendants also seek to file sealed exhibits in support of their Reply. (Doc. 269.) Specifically, Defendants seek to file and seal Exhibits A-E. (Id.) These include three exhibits that contain “still frames” of police body worn camera videos and two exhibits in the form of deposition testimony, that rebut Plaintiffs' response as to the minor's alleged emotional harm. (Id.) As mentioned above, Plaintiffs did not file a response in opposition to this motion to seal. The Court agrees with Defendants that the still frames could be useful in resolving the underlying motion for summary judgment. The Court also agrees that the deposition testimony may be used to rebut arguments raised in Plaintiffs' response to the motion for summary judgment. Thus, the Court grants Defendants' motion to file Exhibits A-E under seal.
The Court now turns to both Defendants' and Plaintiffs' motions to file nonelectronic exhibits (Docs. 248, 262). Defendants seek leave to file the following nonelectronic exhibits in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment: (1) a compact disc (“CD”) containing Officer Tolbert's Body Worn Camera Video; (2) a CD containing Officer Schneider's Body Worn Camera Video; (3) a CD containing Officer Lindsey's Body Worn Camera Video; and (4) a CD containing Motel 6 Surveillance Video. (Doc. 248.) Plaintiffs seek leave to file the same non-electronic exhibits, except Officer Tolbert's body worn camera video. (Doc. 262.) The Court ordered the parties to file a joint supplemental brief addressing these non-electronic exhibits. (Doc. 263.) The parties timely filed a responsive brief. (Doc. 264.) After considering that joint supplemental brief, the Court will grant their requests as modified by this Order. The parties shall file the redacted videos, which are publicly available and have been released to the media, unsealed. See Doe 1 v. McAleenan, No. 18-CV-02349-BLF-VKD, 2019 WL 5208124, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 16, 2019). The parties shall also file the unredacted versions of the videos under seal. The motions (Docs. 248, 262) are therefore granted as modified above.
The Court notes that this Order seals certain documents and non-electronic exhibits for summary judgment purposes only. The Court is not inclined to seal anything for trial, should this case proceed to that stage.
IT IS ORDERED granting Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Under Partial Seal Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 247). An unredacted version of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, and unredacted versions of Exhibits 8, 19, 20, 21, and 22 and non-electronic Exhibits 9, 12, and 13 attached to Defendants' Statement of facts in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment shall be sealed. As ordered below, redacted versions of Exhibits 9, 12, and 13 shall be filed unsealed.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Non-Electronic Exhibits in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 248) as modified above and ordered below.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Non-Electronic Exhibits in Support of Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 262) as modified above and ordered below.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Under Partial Seal Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 268).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Exhibits in Support of Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal (Doc. 269). Defendants shall lodge Exhibits A-E, as referenced in their motion (Doc. 269), to be filed under seal.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that by no later than August 27, 2021:
1. Defendants shall lodge unredacted versions of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 245) and unredacted versions of Exhibits 8, 19, 20, 21, and 22 attached to Defendants' Statement of facts in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 246) for filing under seal by the Clerk of Court pursuant to this Order.
2. Defendants shall lodge an unredacted version of their Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 267) for filing under seal by the Clerk of Court pursuant to this Order.
3. Defendants shall lodge unredacted versions of Exhibits A-E outlined in their Motion for Leave to File Exhibits in Support of Defendants' Reply in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal (Doc. 269) for filing under seal by the Clerk of Court pursuant to this Order.
4. Defendants shall file the four CDs referenced in their motion (Doc. 248) in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Clerk of the Court. Defendants shall file the redacted videos, which are publicly available and have been released to the media, unsealed. Defendants shall also file the unredacted versions of the videos under seal.
5. Plaintiffs shall file the three CDs referenced in their motion (Doc. 262) in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Clerk of the Court. Plaintiffs shall file the redacted videos, which are publicly available and have been released to the media, unsealed. Plaintiffs shall also file the unredacted versions of the videos under seal.