Opinion
2:10-cr-119-GEB-EFB
08-25-2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. REGINALD BOWSER, Defendant.
ORDER
Yesterday, the Government submitted documents for in camera review, via an email to the Courtroom Deputy, for determination as to whether the documents could be filed under seal. The documents were filed under seal, except for the Government's approximately two page document titled "Government's request to submit exhibits under seal in support of its opposition to Defendant's motion for hearing pursuant to Franks v. Delaware[.]"
The Court was mystified as to why the sealing request was made concerning this document and had the Courtroom Deputy contact the U.S. Attorneys Office for clarification, based on the assumption that the Government mistakenly submitted this document for sealing. Today the Government requested through an email communication sent to the Courtroom Deputy that this document be sealed. However, the Government fails to justify this sealing request. Therefore, this document will be returned to the Government by placing it into the U.S. Attorneys Office mailbox located in the Clerk's Office. 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 document requested to be filed under seal should be returned to the submitted party so they can decide whether to file it on the public docket if so desired).
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
United States District Judge