Icanotes-EHR

(PS) Pearson v. Icanotes-EHR

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 11, 20212:20-cv-01720California290 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 NICOLE PEARSON, No. 2:20-cv-1720 KJM DB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER ICANOTES-EHR, et al., Defendants, 16 Plaintiff Nicole Pearson is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On March 1, 2021, plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 13.) Plaintiff also filed a request seeking an order sealing this action. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff’s request, however, does not make the necessary showing to justify sealing this action. See Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir. 2016) (party seeking to seal judicial records normally bears the burden of overcoming strong presumption in favor of public access by showing compelling reasons). Nonetheless, out of an abundance of caution, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.