Opinion
2:24-cv-01421-DJC-AC
10-16-2024
JONATHAN GROVEMAN, Plaintiff, v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, MICHAEL V. DRAKE, GARY S. MAY, MARY CROUGHAN, RENETTA GARRISON TULL, CLARE SHINNERL, PABLO REGUERIN, AND DOES 1-10, Defendants.
Matthew R. Cowan
Matthew R. Cowan
DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF REQUEST TO REDACT LIMITED PORTIONS OF EXHIBIT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS; ORDER
THE HONORABLE DANIEL J. CALABRETTA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Pursuant to Local Rule 140 and this Court's Standing Order in Civil Cases, Defendants The Regents of the University of California, Michael V. Drake, Gary S. May, Mary Croughan, Renetta Garrison Tull, Clare Shinnerl, and Pablo Reguerin (“Defendants”) respectfully request leave to redact personally identifiable information in a single exhibit in support of Defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss the first amended complaint. Plaintiff consents to this request and has approved of the proposed redactions.
Per this Court's most recent order regarding the briefing schedule, the deadline for Defendants to respond to the amended complaint is October 17, 2024. (ECF No. 29.) Defendants anticipate filing a motion to dismiss, accompanied by several supporting exhibits comprising documents incorporated into the complaint. One supporting exhibit consists of an email Plaintiff sent to officials at the University of California, Davis with an attachment of a report that Plaintiff filed with the U.S. Department of Justice. The report contains Plaintiff's home address and phone number. Defendants seek permission to redact that sensitive personal information in its filing before this Court. A copy of the exhibit with the proposed redactions is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Pursuant to Local Rule 140 and this Court's Standing Order in Civil Cases, prior approval of the Court is required in order to redact this information. Redaction is warranted here “[i]n light of legitimate privacy concerns.” Brown v. Elk Grove Unified Sch. Dist., No. 2:17-CV-00396-KJM-DB, 2019 WL 13095063, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 19, 2019) (granting request to redact telephone numbers and home addresses); see also, e.g., Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1184 (9th Cir. 2006) (affirming order permitting redaction of home addresses); Kemper Indep. Ins. Co. v. Wells, No. 117CV01612AWISAB, 2018 WL 558791, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2018) (authorizing redaction of defendants' home addresses); Pryor v. City of Clearlake, No. C 11-0954 CW, 2012 WL 3276992, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2012) (authorizing redaction of information including addresses and telephone numbers). “[T]he public's interest in access to documents,” Kemper, 2018 WL 558791, at *1, will be safeguarded because the vast majority of the document will remain publicly accessible, and the minimal information proposed to be redacted has no bearing on the issues in the case or arguments raised in the motion to dismiss. For these reasons, Defendants respectfully request that this Court authorize the limited redactions sought by Defendants and consented to by Plaintiff.
ORDER
This Court, having considered the Request to Redact Limited Portions of Exhibit in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants The Regents of the University of California, Michael V. Drake, Gary S. May, Mary Croughan, Renetta Garrison Tull, Clare Shinnerl, and Pablo Reguerin (“Defendants”), and compelling reason appearing therefor, hereby ORDERS as follows:
Defendants' Request to Redact Limited Portions of Exhibit in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Defendants may file the exhibit with Plaintiff's home address and phone number redacted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.