Citynet, LLC v. Frontier West Virginia, Inc., et al, No. 2:2014cv15947 - Document 306 (S.D.W. Va. 2022)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING RESPONSE AND EXHIBITS directing that Plaintiff Citynet, LLC's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal Response in Opposition to Defendants' Second Motion for Protective Order along with attached Exhibit A be GRANTED; the Clerk shall file the Response and Exhibit A (ECF Nos. 297-1, 2) under seal; the Motion itself (ECF No. 297), should not be sealed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert on 4/26/2022. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented parties) (btm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Citynet, LLC v. Frontier West Virginia, Inc., et al Doc. 306 Case 2:14-cv-15947 Document 306 Filed 04/26/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 4209 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION CITYNET, LLC, on behalf of United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 2:14-cv-15947 FRONTIER WEST VIRGINIA, INC., et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SEALING RESPONSE AND EXHIBITS Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Citynet, LLC’S Motion for Leave to File Under Seal, (ECF No. 297), requesting its Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Second Motion for Protective Order along with attached Exhibit A be filed as sealed. The Court notes that the attached Response and cited exhibit contains confidential information. Due to the confidential nature of this information, this Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to seal and ORDERS the Clerk to seal Plaintiff’s Response and attached Exhibit A. (ECF Nos. 297-1, 2). The Motion itself, (ECF No. 297), should not be sealed. The undersigned is cognizant of the well-established Fourth Circuit precedent recognizing a presumption in favor of public access to judicial records. Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288 (4th Cir. 2000). As stated in Ashcraft, before sealing a document, the Court must follow a three-step process: (1) provide public notice of the request to seal; (2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the document; and (3) provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:14-cv-15947 Document 306 Filed 04/26/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 4210 and for rejecting alternatives. Id. at 302. In this case, the response and attached exhibit shall be sealed and will be designated as sealed on the Court’s docket. The Court deems this sufficient notice to interested members of the public. The Court has considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, but in view of the nature of the information set forth in the documents—which is information generally protected from public release—alternatives to wholesale sealing are not feasible at this time. Accordingly, the Court finds that sealing the response and attached exhibit does not unduly prejudice the public’s right to access court documents. Accordingly, the Clerk is DIRECTED to file the Response and Exhibit A (ECF No. 297-1, 2) under seal. The Clerk is instructed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented parties. ENTERED: April 26, 2022
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
