Case: 18-12155 Date Filed: 11/26/2018 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 18-12155
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cr-20874-JAL-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALAN RENE SAJOUS,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(November 26, 2018)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, BRANCH and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 18-12155 Date Filed: 11/26/2018 Page: 2 of 3
Alan Sajous appeals pro se the denial without prejudice of his motion to seal
records. Sajous sought to seal records to prevent retaliation for his past cooperation
with the government to prosecute his cohorts for using stolen identities to
fraudulently obtain tax refunds. The district court ruled that Sajous had “not
provided any factual basis relating to himself or his family that provides a basis for
sealing entries in the court’s docket.” We affirm.
The district court has “discretion to determine which portions of the record
should be placed under seal, but [that] discretion is guided by the presumption of
public access to judicial documents.” Perez-Guerrero v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 717 F.3d
1224, 1235 (11th Cir. 2013). “The press and public enjoy a qualified First
Amendment right of access to criminal trial proceedings.” United States v. Ochoa-
Vasquez, 428 F.3d 1015, 1028 (11th Cir. 2005). In addition, “the courts of this
country recognize a general right to inspect and copy public records and
documents, including judicial documents and records.” Nixon v. Warner
Commc’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). The presumption favoring public access to
trial documents may be overcome if a party establishes that his rights are
undermined by publicity. Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Ct. of Cal. for Riverside Cty.,
478 U.S. 1, 9 (1986). To rebut the presumption in favor of public access, the
requesting party must establish that sealing the records “is essential to preserve
2
Case: 18-12155 Date Filed: 11/26/2018 Page: 3 of 3
higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest.” Id. (quoting Press-
Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court, 464 U.S. 501, 510 (1984)).
The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Sajous’s motion
to seal records. Sajous sought to seal documents and transcripts in three different
sentencing proceedings during which he and prosecutors described the extent of his
assistance as a government informant. Sajous speculated that he or his family
might be harmed based on retaliation allegedly inflicted on the families of
defendants in unrelated cases. Sajous mentioned no threat made to him or his
family even though all of the documents that he sought to seal had been available
to the public for at least a year and his cohorts had known of the extent of his
cooperation for at least that length of time. Without some evidence that sealing the
records of Sajous’s sentencing proceedings was necessary to protect him and his
family’s safety, Sajous could not overcome the presumption in favor of allowing
the public access to his records.
We AFFIRM the denial of Sajous’s motion to seal.
3