From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

D.S. v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Apr 11, 2023
2:22-cv-00246-JCM-NJK (D. Nev. Apr. 11, 2023)

Opinion

2:22-cv-00246-JCM-NJK

04-11-2023

D.S., Plaintiffs, v. CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Defendants.


ORDER [DOCKET NO. 67]

Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's response to a motion to compel, along with several exhibits. Docket No. 67. That response and the exhibits thereto include several instances of personal identifiers that were not redacted. See Docket No. 67 at 5 (minor's full name); Docket No. 67-10 at 4 (unredacted copy of driver's license for guardian ad litem); Docket No. 67-10 at 5 (unredacted birth certificate of minor child); Docket No. 67-10 at 9 (full name and birth date of minor child); Docket No. 67-10 at 7 (birth date of guardian ad litem). Plaintiff's counsel has thus violated the local rules. See Local Rule IC 6-1. Given the circumstances, the Court has instructed the Clerk's Office to seal these documents. No later than April 13, 2023, Plaintiff must file a notice on the docket attaching a copy of the responsive brief and its exhibits with personal identifying information properly redacted.,

To be clear, the Court has not combed the entirety of the record to find improper disclosure of personal identifying information. Cf Local Rule IC 6-1(c) (making clear that it is the filer's responsibility, not the Court's responsibility, to properly redacted personal identifying information). As such, the Court has provided herein only examples of local rules violations and it is counsel's responsibility in refiling the instant papers that all personal identifying information is redacted as required by the governing rules.

This order does not impact the date for filing the reply to the motion to compel.

The Court has previously identified failures to comply with this rule in this case. Docket Nos. 46, 47 (addressing filings by Defendants). All counsel of record are hereby warned that they must strictly comply with these redaction requirements moving forward. Future violations of this rule may result in the imposition of sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

D.S. v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Apr 11, 2023
2:22-cv-00246-JCM-NJK (D. Nev. Apr. 11, 2023)
Case details for

D.S. v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist.

Case Details

Full title:D.S., Plaintiffs, v. CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Apr 11, 2023

Citations

2:22-cv-00246-JCM-NJK (D. Nev. Apr. 11, 2023)