Vontress v. State of Nevada ( 2021 )

1 Jacob B. Lee Nevada Bar No. 012428 2 Jamie D. Guzman Arizona Bar No. 022095 3 (admitted pro hac vice) STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO, PLC 4 3100 West Ray Road, Suite 300 Chandler, Arizona 85226 5 Telephone: (480) 420-1600 Fax: (480) 420-1695 6 JLee@strucklove.com JGuzman@strucklove.com 7 Gina G. Winspear 8 Nevada Bar No. 005552 DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP 9 3301 North Buffalo Drive, Suite 195 Las Vegas, Nevada 89129 10 Telephone: (702) 839-1100 Fax: (702) 839-1113 11 GWinspear@dennettwinspear.com 12 Attorneys for Defendants Thomas, Fuller, Williams, and CoreCivic 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 15 16 GEORGE L. VONTRESS, Case No. 2:18-cv-01746-RFB-BNW 17 Plaintiff, CORECIVIC DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE REGARDING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 18 v. FILE UNDER SEAL 19 STATE OF NEVADA, et al., 20 Defendants. 21 Pursuant to the Court’s Orders (ECF Nos. 298, 301), Defendants Thomas, Fuller, Williams, 22 and CoreCivic (collectively, “CoreCivic Defendants”), through counsel, respond in connection with 23 their Motion to Seal Exhibit 4 of their Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 270). 24 The CoreCivic Defendants requested to file Exhibit 4 of their Motion for Summary 25 Judgment under seal because it exclusively contains Plaintiff’s medical and mental health records. 26 (ECF No. 270.) The CoreCivic Defendants did so in due diligence to any obligations to safeguard 27 such information pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 28 1 (“HIPAA”). Defendants also sought to protect, to the extent possible, Plaintiff’s sensitive and 2 private medical information from public exposure and to avoid potential security risks to Plaintiff 3 that having such information available in the public domain poses while he is still in a secure prison 4 environment (such as, for example, another inmate learning Plaintiff’s medical history and using it 5 to intimidate, threaten, or coerce Plaintiff). 6 The Court denied the CoreCivic Defendants’ motion to seal and ordered that, if Defendants 7 wished to renew the motion, it must be filed by July 19, 2021, or the exhibit would be unsealed. 8 (ECF No. 298.) Because the Court noted that Plaintiff has put his medical condition and medical 9 care at issue in this case and that the majority of the records are related to the central issue in this 10 case, the CoreCivic Defendants did not renew their motion. 11 Chester v. King, 2019 WL 5420213 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2019), cited by the Court, appears 12 to be on-point. There, the defendants moved to seal medical records attached to their motion for 13 summary judgment that had been designated as “confidential” under the protective order in place. 14 Although the district court recognized that “[t]his court, and others within the Ninth Circuit, have 15 recognized that the need to protect medical privacy qualifies as a ‘compelling reason’ for sealing 16 records,” it nevertheless found that the defendants failed to show compelling reasons to seal the 17 particular records at issue, which the court considered to be relevant to the claims in the case. 18 The situation here is nearly identical. Plaintiff’s claims against the CoreCivic Defendants 19 are for deliberate indifference to medical needs. In their Motion for Summary Judgment, the 20 CoreCivic Defendants argued that Plaintiff received a comprehensive umbrella of medical and 21 mental health care at CoreCivic’s Saguaro Correctional Center, such that Plaintiff cannot prove that 22 they were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs.1 (ECF No. 269 at 15–25.) The CoreCivic 23 1 Highly security-sensitive information such as dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and staff 24 first names in Exhibit 4 to the Motion for Summary Judgment have been redacted. First names of correctional personnel are security-sensitive, privacy-protected information to which detainees at 25 CoreCivic’s facilities are not privy, and which are not divulged to current or former detainees in order to protect the employees’ privacy and security. For example, first names do not appear on 26 correctional officer name badges. Putting staff members’ full names on the public docket, where 27 they can be seen by current and former inmates, many of whom are verified members of criminal gangs, would endanger not only staff members, but their families as well. The potential safety risks 28 if staff members’ full names become public record in this matter outweigh the need for the public’s 1 | Defendants moved for leave to file Plaintiff's medical records under seal to protect his medical 2 || privacy and avoid any potential HIPAA violations. Redactions to “non-relevant” information could 3 || not be satisfactorily made, however, as Plaintiffs entire record of care is related to the central issues 4 | in Plaintiffs Complaint. 5 For these reasons, the CoreCivic Defendants did not renew their Motion for Leave to File 6 || Under Seal. The CoreCivic Defendants defer to the Court’s discretion whether Exhibit 4 should be 7 =| unsealed. 8 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 12 day of August, 2021. 9 STRUCK LOVE BOJANOWSKI & ACEDO, PLC 10 By /s/ Jamie D. Guzman 11 Jacob B. Lee Jamie D. Guzman 12 3100 West Ray Road, Suite 300 Chandler, Arizona 85226 13 JLee @strucklove.com 4 JGuzman @ strucklove.com Gina G. Winspear 15 DENNETT WINSPEAR 3301 North Buffalo Dr., Suite 195 16 Las Vegas, NV 89129 GWinspear @ dennettwinspear.com Attorneys for Defendants Thomas, Fuller, Williams, 18 and CoreCivic 19 20 Order 21 Having reviewed ECF No. 304, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of 22 Court shall unseal ECF No. 271. 23 nem. sot on ecumer 08, 2021 gn be we boy 24 BRENDA WES gar JUDGE 25 26 27 || —WwdJ—_ access to that information. (See, e.g., Doc. 137, Freitas v. Thomas, No. CV-13-01364-PHX-SRB 28 | (ESW), United States District Court, District of Arizona, at 3.) -3- 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on August 12, 2021, I electronically transmitted the attached document 3 to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic 4 Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: 5 Aaron D. Ford Attorney General 6 Henry H. Kim (Bar No. 14390) Deputy Attorney General 7 State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 8 555 E. Washington Ave., Ste. 3900 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 9 (702) 486-3095 (phone) (702) 486-3773 (fax) 10 Email: hkim@ag.nv.gov 11 Attorneys for Defendants Frank Dreesen, James Dzurenda, 12 Dwight Neven, and Rene Pena 13 I hereby certify that on this same date, I served the attached document by U.S. Mail, postage 14 prepaid, on the following, who is not a registered participant of the CM/ECF System: 15 George Vontress (NDOC #96499) 16 High Desert State Prison (HDSP) P.O. Box 650 17 Indian Springs, Nevada 89070-0650 18 Plaintiff Pro Se 19 /s/ Jamie D. Guzman 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28