Opinion
2:22-cr-00008-JCM-EJY
01-09-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. GJERGI JUNCAJ, Defendant.
ORDER
ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pending before the Court is the government's Motion to Seal Motion for [sic] Supplemental Protective Order. ECF No. 39. The Motion to Seal explains that the Motion for Supplemental Protective Order “contains information that describes-albeit at a high level-a personal and sensitive event experienced by a witness” to the underlying criminal charge. Id. at 1. However, a review of the Motion for Supplemental Protective Order (ECF No. 40) provides virtually no insight into the nature of the personal and sensitive information the government seeks to maintain under seal.
The Court recognizes there is a strong public interest in access to public records and court documents. Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). There is also a presumption favoring public access to judicial documents as this promotes the accountability and transparency of government agencies. Id. Public access to judicial records is “not absolute.” Kamakana v. City and Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). By their nature, certain documents and information fall outside the public's interest in transparency. Id. (citations omitted). The government cites, inter alia, Lombardi v. Tri West Healthcare Alliance Corp., Case No. 12-cv-285, 2009 WL 1212170, at *1 (D. Ariz. May 4, 2009), for the proposition that “sensitive personal and medical information” is properly sealed. The Court does not take issue with this proposition. However, in this case, the Court has no idea what personal or medical information the government seeks to seal and, therefore, whether that information is properly sealed. The general label is insufficient for the Court's determination.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than Friday, January 13, 2023, the government must file, in camera for the Court's review, either the documents and information or a description of the documents and information it seeks to seal and keep from disclosure to Defendant, while disclosing the same to defense counsel. The Court will promptly evaluate what is submitted and thereafter issue an Order regarding the Motion to Seal.