Judge Sean D. Jordan
Individual Rules, Standing Orders & Policies
- Rules last changed:
Document Filing Requirements12 rules
A movant seeking leave to file materials under seal must file three documents, separately and in the following order:
Motion to seal must include document-by-document balancing and list each proposed redaction
Court's wording
1. Motion to seal (filed under seal). The motion must address the legal standard governing motions to seal, as summarized in Section A above. That is to say, it must include a document-by-document, line-by-line balancing of the public's common law right of access against the interests favoring nondisclosure. In so doing, the motion should list each separate proposed redaction—i.e., each discrete span of text or other material that the movant seeks to redact—and demonstrate that redaction of such material is authorized under controlling precedent.
2. Sealed, unredacted version of the document(s) sought to be sealed. At the time the seal motion is filed, the movant should separately file, under seal, an unredacted version of the document(s) sought to be sealed.
3. Public (non-sealed), redacted copy of the document(s) sought to be sealed. At the time the seal motion is filed, the movant should also separately file a redacted version of the document(s) sought to be sealed. Only that material alleged to be sealable should be redacted. Each redaction must correspond to the listed items in the seal motion.
Order supersedes local rule for sealed documents; non-compliance results in denial and striking
Court's wording
This Order supersedes Local Rule CV-5(a)(7)(E) for the filing of any sealed document in this Court. A movant's failure to address and comply with the legal standard governing motions to seal, as summarized in Section A above, will result in the motion to seal being denied and the sealed document(s) being stricken.
Prisoner civil rights cases in Sherman Division are randomly assigned to magistrate judges at filing.
Court's wording
Effective February 1, 2025, and notwithstanding other case assignment orders of this Court, the Clerk will randomly assign, at the time of filing, each prisoner civil rights case filed in the Sherman Division to a magistrate judge in the Sherman Division to serve as presiding judge and send each party a form to consent to proceed before the magistrate judge upon the party’s appearance in the case.
Section A summarizes the legal standard that applies to motions to seal documents submitted to the Court. Parties should be familiar with this standard before seeking leave to file materials under seal.
Exception for sealing entire document - no public redacted copy required
Court's wording
In the unusual circumstance that a party seeks to seal an entire document, the party. need not file the third document (a public, redacted copy). In all other circumstances, failure to file the third document will result in the first two documents being stricken.
Section B sets out the specific procedures that parties must follow when seeking leave to file materials under seal in civil cases before this Court, and supplements Local Rule 5(a)(7).
- Document
- Motion to seal
Must include
- •Supplements Local Rule 5(a)(7)
This order does not apply to any case that was filed before February 1, 2025.
Magistrate judge can conduct all proceedings if all parties consent.
- Document
- Consent
Include
- •Consent to proceed before magistrate judge
Court's wording
If the plaintiff consents to proceed before the magistrate judge, subject to the consent of each defendant, the magistrate judge is designated to exercise jurisdiction to conduct any and all proceedings as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to conduct the trial of the case, and to order the entry of judgment in the case pursuant to Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 1995).
Non-consenting cases are reassigned to district judge but referred to magistrate for non-dispositive matters.
Court's wording
If the parties do not consent, the Clerk will randomly reassign the case to a district judge in the Sherman Division and automatically . refer the case to the previously presiding magistrate judge for decisions on non-dispositive matters and findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommendation for the disposition of the case.
Filing & Service rules
Sealing & Redaction Procedures
Courts must be ungenerous with discretion to seal judicial records
With these principles in mind, the Fifth Circuit has instructed courts to be “ungenerous with their discretion to seal judicial records.” Id. at 418; see also June Med. Servs., L.L.C. v. Phillips, 22 F.4th 512, 519–20 (5th Cir. 2022) (explaining that the Fifth Circuit “heavily disfavor[s] sealing information placed in the judicial record”).
Civil cases
Page 1 | A. Legal Standard
Standing order governs sealing of documents in civil cases before Judge Jordan
This Order is intended to ensure that the Court complies with governing law on the presumption of public access to judicial proceedings and records, and the requirements for permitting any document submitted to the Court to be filed or kept under seal.
Civil cases
Page 1 | A. Legal Standard
Parties must show compelling interests to overcome presumption of public access
When seeking to seal judicial records, parties must overcome the presumption of public access by showing that compelling countervailing interests favor nondisclosure.
Civil cases
Page 1 | A. Legal Standard
Judicial records belong to the public and must be accessible
“Providing public access to judicial records is the duty and responsibility of the Judicial Branch.” Binh Hoa Le v. Exeter Fin. Corp., 990 F.3d 410, 417 (5th Cir. 2021) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Such records “belong to the American people; they are public, not private, documents.” Id.
Civil cases
Page 1 | A. Legal Standard
This balancing should include a “consideration of less drastic alternatives” to sealing entire documents. Binh Hoa Le, 990 F.3d at 420. For example, where the movant’s interests can be protected by redacting portions of a document, rather than sealing the entire document, courts generally favor redaction as a less drastic alternative.
This balancing should include a “consideration of less drastic alternatives” to sealing entire documents. Binh Hoa Le, 990 F.3d at 420. For example, where the movant’s interests can be protected by redacting portions of a document, rather than sealing the entire document, courts generally favor redaction as a less drastic alternative.
Civil cases
Page 2 | A. Legal Standard
Courts must balance public access rights against nondisclosure interests line-by-line
Thus, courts must “undertake a case- by-case, document-by-document, line-by-line balancing of the public’s common law right of access against the interests favoring nondisclosure.” Id. at 419 (cleaned up); see also DePuy Synthes Prods., Inc. v. Veterinary Orthopedic Implants, Inc., 990 F.3d 1364, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (“[The Federal Circuit] appl[ies] regional circuit law in determining the applicable [sealing] standard,” which is “substantially the same across circuits: the parties seeking confidentiality must present a strong justification to overcome the presumption of public access.”).
Civil cases
Page 2 | A. Legal Standard
Sealing order applies only to civil cases before Judge Jordan
This Order applies only to the filing of documents under seal in civil cases before Judge Sean D. Jordan.
Civil cases
Page 1 | A. Legal Standard
Filing Bundling Requirements
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), all pretrial motions in Sherman Division criminal cases assigned to United States District Judge Sean D. Jordan, with the exception of motions to suppress evidence, to dismiss or quash an indictment or information made by the defendant, to continue, to sever, and to transfer venue, are hereby REFERRED to United States Magistrate Judge Aileen Goldman Durrett or United States Magistrate Judge Bill Davis, as randomly assigned by the Clerk of Court, for consideration and hearing as deemed necessary, and a determination.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), all pretrial motions in Sherman Division criminal cases assigned to United States District Judge Sean D. Jordan, with the exception of motions to suppress evidence, to dismiss or quash an indictment or information made by the defendant, to continue, to sever, and to transfer venue, are hereby REFERRED to United States Magistrate Judge Aileen Goldman Durrett or United States Magistrate Judge Bill Davis, as randomly assigned by the Clerk of Court, for consideration and hearing as deemed necessary, and a determination.
Criminal cases
Page 1 | REFERRAL ORDER