Sealed court filing records

Identifies sealed or suppressed court filings (documents filed under seal, sealed orders and indictments, suppression / non-publication orders) with populated proceeding and party fields.

Type

regex

Engine

boost_regex

Confidence

medium

Confidence justification

Medium: sealing vocabulary is common in court rules, guidance and court reporting, so enforcement requires populated proceeding/party fields; 85 adds filing evidence the primary does not match.

Detection quality

Topic partial

Jurisdictions

global

Regulations

GDPR, Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld), Privacy Act 1988 (Cth)

Data categories

legal, pii

Scope

wide

Risk rating

7

Platform compatibility

Purview: Compatible, GCP DLP: Compatible, Macie: Compatible, Zscaler: Compatible, Palo Alto: Degraded, Netskope: Unsupported

Pattern

(?is)\b(?:sealed\s+record|sealed\s+filing|court\s+seal|sealed\s+indictment|sealed\s+order|under\s+seal|sealed\s+docket|confidential\s+filing|sealed\s+proceeding|sealed\s+court\s+order|expunged\s+record|(?:suppression|non[\s-]publication)\s+order)\b

Corroborative evidence keywords

sealed court filing records

Proximity: 240 characters

Should match

• UNDER SEAL - not to be published Supreme Court of Queensland Proceeding number: BS 4471/26 Applicant: Harbour Freight Pty Ltd Respondent: Jordan Staffson Affidavit of Avery Teston with exhibits AT-1 to AT-9, sealed by order of the Court on 12/08/2026. — 85 - sealed filing with populated proceeding/party fields and affidavit/exhibit evidence
• Sealed filing notice Case number: CV-2026-004471 The document is withheld from the public file pending the hearing. — 75 - one populated proceeding field without filing evidence
• Suppression order copy placed on the matter file. — 65 discovery - topic phrase without populated fields

Should not match

• unrelated generic text without domain phrases — No relevant topic phrases present
• mugshot victim — Generic word pair should not match
• Court rules explain when a party may ask for a sealed filing and how the registry handles documents kept under seal. — Guidance - no populated fields (65 at most)
• Application to file under seal Proceeding number: ________ Applicant: ________ Respondent: [name] — Blank application form - placeholder fields are rejected
• A judge ordered the documents to remain under seal, the court heard on Tuesday. — Court reporting - no populated fields
• Access to the staff intranet is restricted access only. — Generic IT "restricted access" wording no longer matches the primary

Known false positives

• Common words and phrases related to sealed court filing records appearing in policy documents, training materials, HR templates, or compliance guidelines without actual personal data. Mitigation: Require corroborative evidence keywords within the proximity window to confirm sensitive data context rather than general discussion.
• In English (as the primary international business language), similar terminology used in formal or administrative contexts (education, professional documentation) that does not constitute sensitive data collection. Mitigation: Layer with additional contextual signals such as structured identifiers, form fields, or database column headers to distinguish sensitive records from general references.
• High-frequency pattern matches in large document corpora due to broad regex anchors. Expected match rate is significantly higher than specific identifier patterns. Mitigation: Tune confidence thresholds for bulk scanning. Consider using this pattern primarily as a pre-filter with secondary validation.

References

• Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 - Federal Register of Legislation