Judge: Melissa R. Mccormick, Case: "Roe v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, et al.", Date: 2023-08-10 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Jane Doe’s Motion to Seal

Plaintiff Jane Doe moves to seal eleven lines of one page of deposition testimony lodged conditionally under seal in connection with defendants Josh Stansberry and Costco Wholesale Corporation’s respective motions for summary judgment.  See 6/1/23 & 7/27/23 Orders.  No oppositions have been filed.  For the following reasons, plaintiff’s motion is granted.

Unless confidentiality is required by law, court records are presumed to be open.  Cal. R. Ct. 2.550(c).  A record must not be filed under seal without a court order.  Cal. R. Ct. 2.551(a).  The court must not permit a record to be filed under seal based solely on the agreement or stipulation of the parties.  Id.

A party requesting that a court record be filed under seal “must file a motion or an application for an order sealing the record.”  Cal. R. Ct. 2.551(b)(1).  “The motion or application must be accompanied by a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing.”  Id.

A court may order a record be filed under seal only if the court expressly finds facts that establish:  (1)  There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2)  The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3)  A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4)  The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5)  No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.  Cal. R. Ct. 2.550(d).

An order sealing a record must specifically state the facts that support the findings, and direct the sealing of only those documents and pages, or, if reasonably practicable, portions of those documents and pages, that contain the material that needs to be placed under seal.  Cal. R. Ct. 2.550(e)(1).  All other portions of each document or page must be included in the public file.  Id.

Plaintiff’s motion papers, including the memorandum and the Cullen Declaration, satisfy the above standards.  Plaintiff’s privacy right in the mental health information set forth in the lines plaintiff seeks to seal overrides the right of public access to the record, and that interest supports sealing the record.  A substantial probability exists that plaintiff’s privacy right will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed.  The proposed sealing (eleven lines of one page of deposition testimony, of which five of the lines consist of attorney questions) is narrowly tailored.  No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.

Plaintiff to give notice.