Opinion
20-cv-07967-HSG
03-16-2022
NOTT RUBY YOUNGBLOOD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ELLEN ADLER, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL
Re: Dkt. Nos. 34-38, 40-113
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. United States District Judge
Before the Court are dozens of administrative motions to seal. For the reasons described below, those motions are GRANTED.
The Court appointed the Hon. Ellen Sickles James (Ret.) as Special Master in this matter to propose, implement and enforce measures and procedures necessary for the protection of the financial interests of minors or adult persons with a disability (“Protected Persons”) in funds disbursed to satisfy their claims. See Dkt. No. 3. The Court then amended the Order of Appointment of Special Master for the sole purpose of clarifying that all orders issued by the Special Master must also be e-filed on this Court's docket. See Dkt. No. 7.
The Special Master filed a Procedure for Approval of Compromises for Protected Persons, which provides in relevant part that the Special Master's orders reviewing and approving Protected Persons' claims, as well as all associated petitions and accompanying documents, must be filed under seal. See Dkt. No. 17. Due to settlement confidentiality, as well as a need to protect each minor's private information, claimants have also been directed by the Fire Victim Trust to file each Order Approving Minor's Compromise and related documents under seal. See e.g., Dkt. No. 90 at 2.
Because this Court required all orders issued by the Special Master to be e-filed on this Court's docket, the parties seek a second sealing order here so the Special Master's orders can remain sealed. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 34. The Court finds that an administrative order sealing the Special Master's orders reviewing and approving Protected Persons' claims, as well as all associated petitions and accompanying documents, balances the parties' need to comply with these dual-filing requirements while preserving confidential and sensitive information. Under this District's Civil Local Rules, this Court need not go further and independently review each document the Special Master has directed the parties to file under seal. See Civ. Local Rule 79-5(b) (“A party need not file a motion to seal if a federal statute or a prior court order in the same case expressly authorizes the party to file certain documents (or portions of documents) under seal.”). But in any event, this Court also finds “good cause” to seal the documents referenced above to protect the privacy and economic well-being of each minor.
The Court therefore GRANTS Plaintiffs' motions to seal at Docket Nos. 34-37, 40-113. Going forward, the Parties are authorized and directed to e-file each Order Approving Minor's Compromise and related documents under seal on this Court's docket, without filing any additional motion to seal, by referencing this Order and relating that respective docket entry to this Order. The Clerk is directed to remove the documents filed at Docket Nos. 30-32 from the docket. This Order TERMINATES Dkt. No. 38.
IT IS SO ORDERED.