Opinion
Civil Action No. 06-cv-00290-PSF-MJW.
February 24, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Certain Exhibits Under Seal (Dkt. # 2), filed concurrently with their Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award on February 21, 2006. Plaintiffs' motion to seal fails to indicate compliance (or inability to comply) with D.C.COLO.L.CivR 7.1A, which imposes on a moving party a duty to make "reasonable good-faith efforts to confer with opposing counsel." Although service of process has apparently not yet been effected on defendants, and that may be a justification for noncompliance with the local rule, the motion is nonetheless DENIED without prejudice on other grounds.
Plaintiffs have not demonstrated a sufficient basis for filing the exhibits under seal. A confidentiality stipulation in the underlying arbitration does not warrant the sealing of documents in a case filed in a public court absent a showing of why the documents should be treated confidentially — i.e., that their disclosure would provide competitive advantages for business rivals, reveal privileged information or trade secrets, or divulge scandalous or impertinent matter.