From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reade v. N.Y. Times Co.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 30, 2022
2:22-cv-00543 WBS KJN (E.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-00543 WBS KJN

06-30-2022

TARA READE, Plaintiff, v. THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, Defendant.


ORDER RE: REQUEST TO FILE DOCUMENT UNDER SEAL

WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

In conjunction with its motion to dismiss (Docket No. 10) and its special motion to strike (Docket No. 11), defendant has submitted a request to file under seal an unredacted version of the photograph plaintiff provided to it. (Request to File Under Seal (“Request”), Docket No. 13.)) That photograph is an image of plaintiff's ID card from the United States Senate and contains what the parties represent is the upper half of her Social Security number.

“The proponent of sealing bears the burden” of overcoming a “strong presumption in favor of [public] access.” Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178, 1182 (9th Cir. 2006). To do so, the party must “articulate[ ] compelling reasons,” Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003) (citing San Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 187 F.3d 1096, 1102-03 (9th Cir. 1999)), “that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the ‘public interest in understanding the judicial process,'” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 117879 (quoting Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995)). “In turn, the court must ‘conscientiously balance the competing interests' of the public and the party who seeks to keep certain judicial records secret.” Id. at 1179 (quoting Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1135) (alteration adopted).

In its request, defendant contends that sealing is necessary so that the image may be considered “in its unredacted form,” as defendant contends is necessary to show that defendant “had no independent reason to believe, based on the face of the photograph, that the number partially shown at the bottom was a social security number.” (Request at ¶ 2.) The court agrees.

Nevertheless, although the unredacted image may not be filed publicly, the court believes that publication of as much of the image as possible, consistent with plaintiff's right of privacy, is also necessary to allow for a full understanding of the court's decision on defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint and the reasons for it.

Accordingly, balancing the importance of public access to judicial records -- as is necessary to serve the “public interest in understanding the judicial process,” Hagestad, 49 F.3d at 1434 -- against individuals' privacy interests, see Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179, the court will adopt the procedure set forth in Local Rule 140(a)(iii), which allows publication of Social Security numbers in partially redacted form, publishing only the last four digits of the number. Thus, in addition to granting the request to file the unredacted image under seal, the court will also attach a partially redacted image of plaintiff's Senate ID as an exhibit to its Order on defendant's motion to dismiss, which unlike the version of the image to be filed under seal, will omit the first five digits of what plaintiff alleges to be her Social Security number.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant's request (Docket No. 13) is GRANTED. The Clerk is hereby directed to file the unredacted image of plaintiff's Senate ID, provided by defendant as Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Al-Amyn Sumar (Docket No. 12), under seal.


Summaries of

Reade v. N.Y. Times Co.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 30, 2022
2:22-cv-00543 WBS KJN (E.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2022)
Case details for

Reade v. N.Y. Times Co.

Case Details

Full title:TARA READE, Plaintiff, v. THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 30, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-00543 WBS KJN (E.D. Cal. Jun. 30, 2022)