E.E.
E.E. v. Norris School District
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
wow 4 OU VV VR MVVUOCTI ot POO tee eV
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 E.E., a minor, by and through his guardian CASE NO. 1:20-CV-1291 AWI JLT ad litem, LAURA HUTCHINSON- 9 ESCOBEDO; CHRISTOPHER ORDER SEALING DOCUMENT 17-1 ESCOBEDO; and LAURA 10 HUTCHINSON-ESCOBEDO Plaintiffs v. NORRIS SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant 15 16 Defendant Norris School District filed the January 22, 2020 IEP of Plaintiff E.E. as an 18 attachment to legal briefing on September 30, 2020. In the docket, it is Document 17-1. The IEP 19 was unredacted and included E.E.’s full name. E.E. is a minor. In general, there is a “very strong 20 privacy interest” in protecting the personal information of a minor. Jenkins v. Wash. Metro. Area 21 Transit Auth., 960 F. Supp. 2d 2, 16 (D.D.C. 2013). For this reason, Document 17-1 is ordered 22 SEALED so that it is only accessible by the court and the parties to this case.