Opinion
2:10-cv-00508-GEB-DAD.
September 13, 2011
ORDER
Plaintiffs submitted to chambers via an email to the Courtroom Deputy, for an in camera consideration, a "Request to Seal Documents" and the documents Plaintiffs seek to have sealed. Plaintiffs state this sealing request is made in connection with their motion for summary adjudication of issues.
Since it is evident that Plaintiffs' "Request to Seal Documents" should have been filed on the public docket, the Clerk of the Court shall file Plaintiffs' "Request to Seal Documents" on the public docket.
Plaintiffs indicate their authority justifying sealing the other documents is a "Stipulation and Order to Protect Confidential Information" ("Stipulation"), filed in this action as Docket Number 35 on March 22, 2011. However, this authority has not been shown sufficient to justify the sealing request; therefore, the request is denied.
In light of this ruling, the referenced documents are not part of the court docketing system. See United States v. Baez-Alcaino, 718 F. Supp. 1503, 1507 (M.D. Fla. 1989) (explaining that when a judge decides in camera that the movant for a sealing order fails to justify a sealing request, the documents are returned to the movant so that the movant can decide what, if any, action should be taken to have the documents included in the court's docketing system).
Dated: September 12, 2011