Amendola et al v. Reissner et al

Filing 27

ORDER VACATING May 21, 2012 Hearing re 21 Motion for Summary Judgment, Taking Matter Under Submission, and ORDER for Plaintiffs' Response to Sealing Request by May, 24, 2012 at 10:00 a.m., signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/16/2012. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
HOWARD REISSNER, an individual,
)
AMY REISSNER, an individual, and
)
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
)
AND RELATED COUNTER CLAIM
)
____________________________________)
LOUIS J. AMENDOLA, an individual,
FRESNO BEVERAGE COMPANY,
d.b.a. VALLEY WIDE BEVERAGE
COMPANY, a California Corporation,

1:11-cv-1001 AWI SKO
VACATING MAY 21, 2012
HEARING, TAKING MATTER
UNDER SUBMISSION, AND
ORDER FOR RESPONSE TO
SEALING REQUEST

16
17
Currently set for hearing and decision on May 21, 2012, is Defendants’ motion for
18
summary judgment. Pursuant to Local Rule 230(h), the Court has reviewed the moving papers
19
and has determined that the matter is suitable for decision without oral argument.
20
Additionally, Defendants have filed a notice of request to seal two documents, Exhibits D
21
and E. Magistrate Judge Oberto previously denied a stipulated request to seal these documents,
22
but did so without prejudice. Defendants indicate that they do not believe that there is
23
confidential information in these exhibits, but have entered into a stipulation to file the
24
documents under seal. Defendants further indicate that they filed the request as per the
25
suggestion of Magistrate Judge Oberto and to give Plaintiffs the opportunity to explain their
26
position to the Court. To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to the request to seal. The Court
27
believes that a response from Plaintiffs on this issue is appropriate.
28

1
2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

3
4

The previously set hearing date of May 21, 2012, is VACATED, and as of May 21, 2012,
the Court will take the matters under submission and will thereafter issue its decision; and

2.

As soon as possible, but no later than 10:00 a.m. on May 24, 2012, Plaintiffs shall file a

5

response to the request to seal documents which addresses the concerns raised by the

6

Magistrate Judge in the April 18, 2012 order (Doc. No. 20) and explains why sealing is

7

appropriate.1

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
10

Dated:
ciem0h

May 16, 2012
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1

27

If Plaintiffs fail to meet this deadline, the Court will deny the request to seal and order
Exhibits D and E filed on the docket.

28

daw

2