Gustafson v. Goodman Manufacturing Company LP et al

Filing 76

ORDER - Plaintiff shall file a redacted, unsealed motion for classcertification, and all related documents, by 11/9/2015. Plaintiff shallcontemporaneously file a sealed motion to seal as detailed in the attached Order. FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument on 54 Motion to Certify Class for 3/2/2016 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom 503, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Senior Judge James A Teilborg. To assist the Court Reporter, each party shall prepare and bring a table of author ities to oral argument. FINALLY ORDERED setting Jury Trial for 1/9/2017 at 09:00 AM in Courtroom 503, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Senior Judge James A Teilborg. If the Court denies all dispositive motions, Plaintiff shall file a Notice of Readiness for a Final Pretrial Conference within 5 days of the Order denying the motions. See attached Order. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 10/30/2015. (TLB)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

James Gustafson,

No. CV-13-08274-PCT-JAT
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Goodman Manufacturing Company LP, et
al.,

13
14

Defendants.

15

Sealing Documents

16

Pending before the Court is a motion for class certification (Doc. 54) the

17

supporting memorandum for which was filed completely under seal. (Docs. 53 and 65).

18

This Court has not undertaken to determine whether this procedure was consistent with

19

the parties’ protective order (Doc. 41).

20

Regardless, this Court finds that the Order permitting filing under seal does not

21

articulate the basis for sealing as required under Ninth Circuit law. See Foltz v. State

22

Farm, 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003) (requiring the district court, prior to sealing

23

to, “consider all relevant factors, including: the public interest in understanding the

24

judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in improper use of the

25

material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets.... After

26

taking all relevant factors into consideration, the district court must base its decision on a

27
28

compelling reason and articulate the factual basis for its ruling, without relying on
hypothesis or conjecture.”) (quoting Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th

1

Cir.1995)). Further, Plaintiff has failed to articulate, on an item by item basis, why each

2

line of the memorandum must be under seal. See San Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. U.S.

3

District Court - - Northern District (San Jose), 187 F.3d 1096, 1103 (9th Cir. 1999)

4

(party must make “a particularized showing of good cause with respect to any individual

5

document”).

6

Accordingly, Plaintiff will be required to file an unsealed, redacted version of the

7

memorandum in support of the motion for class certification. For each item Plaintiff

8

redacts, Plaintiff must file (under seal) a motion to seal, articulating a specific basis

9

(supported by law) that would justify sealing each redacted item individually. To allow

10
11
12
13
14
15

this Court to articulate its factual basis for any ruling, Plaintiff may not make generalized
assertions like “all items are trade secrets,” but instead must explain how each document
or item qualifies as a trade secret (Plaintiff’s motion to seal must also include justification
for sealing any related document currently under seal).
In filing any future documents in this case (including responses and replies to the
motion for class certification), the parties must follow this procedure. Specifically,

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

before any party files any document under seal such party shall seek leave of Court and
shall show “compelling reasons” (dispositive motion) or “good cause” (non-dispositive
motion) for filing under seal. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d
1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 2006). Additionally, such party seeking to file under seal shall,
within the applicable deadline, file a redacted, unsealed version of any motion, response
or reply if such party is waiting for a ruling from the Court on filing an unredacted, sealed

23

version of the same document. Finally, at least 5 days before any document will be filed

24

in which a party will seek to seal the opposing parties’ information, the parties shall

25

confer to determine whether the opposing party will waive the confidentiality

26

designation. If not, then the filing party shall file a motion to seal when the document is

27

filed, and the opposing party who designated the documents as confidential shall, within

28

1 day, file a supporting memorandum justifying why its documents must be sealed.

-2-

1

Deadlines

2

The Court notes that the deadlines set in this case by the prior Judge already far

3

exceed the amount of time to litigate a case that the Court would have permitted. See 28

4

U.S.C. § 473(a)(2)(B) (district courts should have cases to trial within eighteen months of

5

when they are filed). While the Court will not accelerate the deadlines currently set for

6

briefing the motion for class certification, or the close of discovery and the filing of

7

dispositive motions, the parties are cautioned that there will be NO EXTENSIONS of

8

these deadlines. Further, if the parties have already received extended briefing schedules

9

for any future motions, those deadlines are vacated. Other than the motion for class

10
11
12
13
14
15

certification currently pending, all responses and replies will be due within the deadlines
set by the Local Civil Rules. The Court will hear oral argument on the Motion for Class
Certification on March 2, 2016 at 1:30.
Finally, the Court will set a firm trial date (in the event no dispositive motion is
granted) of January 9, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. Again, there will be no continuances of this
deadline. Thus, counsel should advise all witnesses and experts of this trial date

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

immediately and have them arrange their calendars accordingly; further counsel shall be
satisfied of their availability for this trial date, and if in doubt, ensure that other members
of the law firm will be available to try the case.
Conclusion
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a redacted, unsealed motion for class
certification, and all related documents, by November 9, 2015.

Plaintiff shall

contemporaneously file a sealed motion to seal as detailed above.

24

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting oral argument on the motion for class

25

certification (Doc. 54) for March 2, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. To assist the Court Reporter, each

26

party shall prepare and bring a table of authorities to oral argument.

27

///

28

///

-3-

1

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED setting trial to begin January 9, 2017 at 9:00 a.m.

2

If the Court denies all dispositive motions, Plaintiff shall file a Notice of Readiness for a

3

Final Pretrial Conference within 5 days of the Order denying the motions.

4

Dated this 30th day of October, 2015.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-4-