Natl Assn of Optomet, et al v. Lockyer, et al

Filing 555

ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 4/8/2010 GRANTING 551 Motion to File documents under Seal and to file public versions supporting defendants' reply on Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike. (Matson, R)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
1 [Proposed] Order (CIV-S-02-1464 LKK DAD)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF OPTOMETRISTS & OPTICIANS, LENSCRAFTERS, INC., EYE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA, INC.,

Case No. CIV-S-02-1464 LKK DAD

v.

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL AND TO FILE PUBLIC VERSIONS Plaintiffs, SUPPORTING DEFENDANTS' REPLY ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PIKE

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND BRIAN J. STIGER, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, Defendants.

Date: Time: Courtroom: Judge:

April 19, 2010 10:00 a.m. 4 The Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton

Defendants Edmund G. Brown Jr., in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, and Brian J. Stiger, in his official capacity as the Director of the Department of Consumer Affairs' Motion to File Documents Under Seal and to File Public Versions Supporting Defendants' Reply on Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike having been duly considered; ///

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion is GRANTED and that Defendants are permitted to file the following documents pursuant to their request: 1. Supplemental Declaration of Philip M. Parker, PhD Supporting Defendants' Reply on

Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike ­ Public and Under Seal Versions. 2. Defendants' Reply Supporting Defendants' Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts

in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike and in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike ­ Under Seal Version only. 3. Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs' Evidentiary Objections and Opposition to

Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike Defendants' Declarations and Evidence Submitted in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike and in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Pike ­ Under Seal Version only. 4. Defendants' Evidentiary Objections to, and Motion to Strike, Declarations and

Evidence Submitted by Plaintiffs on Motions for Summary Judgment on Pike ­ Under Seal Version only. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' request that the Court not "indefinitely" seal any documents filed in conjunction with the pending dispositive Motions for Summary Judgment on Pike or Oppositions to Motions for Summary Judgment on Pike will be further considered following resolution of the parties' summary judgment motions. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 8, 2010

2 [Proposed] Order (CIV-S-02-1464 LKK DAD)

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com