Spurbeck v. Wyndham Worldwide ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 TANYA SPURBECK, Case No. 2:20-cv-00346-RFB-NJK 9 Plaintiff(s), Order 10 v. [Docket No. 108-1] 11 WYNDHAM DESTINATIONS, INC., et al., 12 Defendant(s). 13 Plaintiff marked a document she filed with the Court as “confidential,” prompting that 14 document to be filed under seal. Docket No. 108-1. 15 There is a strong presumption in favor of the public’s access to judicial filings. See, e.g., 16 Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006). Documents filed in 17 relation to a non-dispositive matter may not be sealed absent a particularized showing of good 18 cause. Id. at 1180. 19 The exhibit at issue here is a copy of a published research paper that is on its face publicly 20 available. Docket No. 108-1 at 2 (“The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available 21 on Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.htm”).1 As such, there appears to be 22 no basis for that document to remain sealed. Cf. Protectmarriage.com-Yes on 8 v. Bowen, 752 23 F.3d 827, 834 (9th Cir. 2014) (“once a fact is widely available to the public, a court cannot grant 24 ‘effective relief’ to a person seeking to keep that fact a secret”). 25 26 27 1 A simple web search also appears to provide the exact same document in publicly- 28 available form. See https://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/articles/acrfonline.pdf. 1 No later than June 2, 2021, Plaintiff must explain in writing why this exhibit should remain sealed. Failure to do so will result in the exhibit being unsealed. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: May 26, 2021 . Nancy J. Koppé, *, 6 United StatesMagistrate Judge , 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28