Opinion
20cr2914-LAB
07-16-2021
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CYNTHA LEON MONTOYA, Defendant.
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO REDACT WITHOUT PREJUDICE [DKT. 69]
Hon. Larry Alan Burns United States District Judge
Defendant Cynthia Leon Montoya was sentenced at a hearing in open court on May 17, 2021. She has moved the Court to redact from the public docket three lines of that hearing's transcript. (Dkt. 69.) Montoya states that these lines disclose “names allegedly referenced by [her] during a safety valve interview/debrief with the government.” (Id.)
The movant seeking a sealing order bears the burden of demonstrating “compelling reasons” resting on an “articula[ble] . . . factual basis.” Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006). Montoya doesn't provide any compelling reason to seal information from her safety valve interview that the prosecution disclosed two months ago in open court and without objection from Montoya's counsel. See, e.g., Hynix Semiconductor v. Rambus, 2009 WL 2246204, at *2 (N.D. Cal., July 27, 2009) (futile to seal documents that “have been available to the public for years”). The Court will reconsider the motion if the defendant offers plausible reasons why disclosure of the three names by the prosecutor during the open hearing poses a credible threat to her safety. The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.