Opinion
1:19-CR-00153-3-DJ-BAM
12-26-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. MICHAEL MIZE, Defendant/Movant.
ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO SEAL DOCUMENTS (DOC. 204)
Pursuant to Local Rules 140 and 141, Defendant/Movant, MICHAEL MIZE, requests an order sealing confidential medical records submitted in support of his motion for compassionate release or sentence reduction.
Part of Mize's request is based on HIPAA (42 U.S.C. § 1320d-5(a)(1)) considerations and various cases finding a compelling need to protect medical privacy: “HIPAA's stated purpose of protecting a patient's right to the confidentiality of his or her individual medical information is a compelling federal interest. California similarly recognizes a person's interest in protecting private medical information. See Dep't of Motor Vehicles v. Superior Court, 100 Cal.App.4th 363, 373, 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 504, 511 (Cal.Ct.App.2002).” California v. Crenshaw Mony Life Insurance Company, 318 F.Supp.2d 1015, United States District Court, S.D. (2004). However, of course, HIPAA does not purport to regulate a person's decision to publicize his own medical records. Though courts routinely allow defendants to file medical records under seal, it is striking that Mr. Mize's supplemental memorandum filed on the public docket, reveals his diagnoses. (Doc. 203 at 14-15) Consequently, the Court is at a loss to understand what privacy interest still exists, which would justify sealing the records now.
In addition, Mr. Mize seeks to have his release plan sealed. He fails to explain why this document should be sealed or, if there is particular information that is sensitive contained in the plan, why this information cannot be redacted without the need to seal the records. Consequently, Mr. Mize's request to file under seal his Exhibits A, B, C, and D to his motion to reduce sentence, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.