noting that “[i]t [was] immaterial whether the sealing of the record [was] an integral part of a negotiated settlement between the parties.”
How later courts described this case
- noting that “[i]t [was] immaterial whether the sealing of the record [was] an integral part of a negotiated settlement between the parties.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 20-20824-CIV-O’SULLIVAN
[CONSENT]
SEXUAL MD SOLUTIONS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
V.
DUSTIN WOLFF, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff] Sexual M.D. Solutions, LLC’s Motion
for Leave to File Under Seal (DE# 179, 5/28/20). The Eleventh Circuit has stated that “[o]nce a
matter is brought before a court for resolution, it is no longer solely the parties’ case, but also
the public’s case. Absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances . . . the court file must
remain accessible to the public.” Brown v. Advantage Eng’g, Inc., 960 F.2d 1013, 1016 (11th
Cir. 1992) (noting that “[i]t [was] immaterial whether the sealing of the record [was] an integral
part of a negotiated settlement between the parties.”). The instant motion fails to demonstrate
good cause to support the sealing of the plaintiff's reply. Having reviewed the applicable filings
and the law, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintif[f] Sexual M.D. Solutions, LLC’s Motion for
Leave to File Under Seal (DE# 179, 5/28/20) is DENIED without prejudice. The plaintiff shall
promptly submit an unredacted version of its reply to osullivan @flsd.uscourts.gov. The parties
shall be prepared to argue why the motion to seal should be granted at the May 29, 2020
hearing.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers af Miami, Florida, this 28th day of May, 2020.
_ LA MOE
J J. O'SULLIVAN
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE