Opinion
ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge.
On October 6, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to seal documents, seeking "to seal the previously filed Declaration of Robert E. O'Connor in Support of Opposition to Motion For Summary Judgment and attached exhibits, Document Number 19 on the docket in the above-captioned matter (the "Declaration"), as this document was inadvertently filed with the Court without all necessary redactions being finalized." (Defs.' Sealing Mot. 1:23-26, ECF No. 22.) Defendants contend: "the Declaration and attached exhibits contain certain private information of Defendants and third parties including complete social security numbers, birth dates, and/or financial account numbers. The public does not have an interest in the disclosure of the above-described private information." (Id. 2:1-4.) Defendants "[f]urther[]... request that they be permitted to file a fully redacted version of the Declaration[, ]" arguing "th[e] filing will not prejudice Plaintiff UNITED STATES, as it will be an identical version of the original Declaration, filed and served with the original opposition papers, except that it will redact permissible information under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(a)." (Id. at 2:4-8.) Notwithstanding Defendants' request to file a redacted version, review of the docket reveals Defendants already filed a redacted version of the Declaration and exhibits in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(a) and Local Rule 140(a) on October 6, 2015. (See ECF No. 23.)
Defendants' sealing request is denied. However, the Clerk of the Court is directed to remove from the docket the originally filed Declaration of Robert E. O'Connor in Support of Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 19), with the unredacted exhibits since they contain information prohibited by Rule 5.2(a) and Local Rule 140(a). See CBS, Inc. v. United States Dist. Court for the Cent. Dist. of Cal., 765 F.2d 823, 825-26 (9th Cir. 1985) (ordering "improvidently filed" document "retracted... from the [docket]").