Stott v. Dzurenda

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 PHILIP STOTT, Case No. 3:19-cv-00133-MMD-WGC 4 Petitioner, ORDER 5 V. 6 JAMES DZURENDA, et al., Respondents. 8 This habeas matter is before the Court on Respondents’ Motion for Leave to File 9 || Exhibits Under Seal (ECF No. 24). Respondents seek leave to file under seal two exhibits 10 || in support of the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 8): Petitioner's Confidential Psychological 11 || and Substance Evaluation (ECF No. 25-1); and Presentence Investigation Report (“PSI”) 12 || (ECF No. 25-2). Under Nevada law, the PSI is “confidential and must not be made a part 13 || of any public record.” NRS § 176.156(5). In addition, the need to protect medical privacy 14 || generally qualifies as a “compelling reason” for sealing records in connection with a 15 || dispositive motion. E.g., Abbey v. Hawaii Emp’rs Mut. Ins. Co. (HEMIC), 760 F. Supp. 2d 16 || 1005, 1013 (D. Haw. 2010); see also NRS § 433A.715(1) (requiring courts to seal records 17 || related to mental health treatment). 18 Having reviewed and considered the matter in accordance with Kamakana v. City 19 || and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006), and its progeny, the Court finds 20 || that a compelling need to protect Petitioner's safety, medical privacy, and/or personal 21 || identifying information outweighs the public interest in open access to court records. 22 || Accordingly, the Motion (ECF No. 24) is granted, and the exhibits (ECF No. 25) are 23 || considered properly filed under seal. 24 DATED THIS 16!" day of September 2019. 26 MIRANDA MLDU 57 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE