From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomson v. Williams

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 12, 2022
2:17-cv-02932-RFB-EJY (D. Nev. Dec. 12, 2022)

Opinion

2:17-cv-02932-RFB-EJY

12-12-2022

DAVID ROBERT THOMSON, Petitioner, v. BRIAN WILLIAMS, et al., Respondents.


ORDER

RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a federal habeas corpus proceeding filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Upon review of the exhibits filed in this matter, it appears Respondents failed to comply with the redaction requirements of Local Rule IC 6-1(a)(2). See ECF No. 48-1 at 6-28. Compelling reasons exist to seal the unredacted document as it contains personal-data identifiers, and the parties cannot change their filings.

Local Rule IC 6-1(a)(2) states “[i]f the involvement of a minor child must be mentioned, only the initials of that child should be used.” According to Local Rule IC 7-1, “[t]he court may strike documents that do not comply with these rules.”

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

1. Respondents must file a redacted publicly available copy of the document filed as ECF No. 48-1 in compliance with Local Rule IC 6-1(a)(2), within 10 days of the date of entry of this order.
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to seal the document filed as ECF No. 48-1.


Summaries of

Thomson v. Williams

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Dec 12, 2022
2:17-cv-02932-RFB-EJY (D. Nev. Dec. 12, 2022)
Case details for

Thomson v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:DAVID ROBERT THOMSON, Petitioner, v. BRIAN WILLIAMS, et al., Respondents.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Dec 12, 2022

Citations

2:17-cv-02932-RFB-EJY (D. Nev. Dec. 12, 2022)