Chacko v. City of Sacramento

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/19/2014 ORDERING that within 10 days plaintiff shall inform the court whether he waives disqualification of the undersigned conducting a settlement conference, or whether the settlement confere nce should be randomly assigned to another magistrate judge. Plaintiff's 31 motion to seal is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the documents attached to plaintiff's 3/17/2014 request to plaintiff. (Zignago, K.) Modified on 3/19/2014 (Zignago, K.).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JESUDAS K. CHACKO,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:12-cv-2881-MCE-EFB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CITY OF SACRAMENTO,
Defendant.

16
17

On February 24, 2014, the parties were ordered to inform the court within fourteen days

18

whether they waive disqualification of the undersigned conducting a settlement conference, or

19

whether the settlement conference should be randomly assigned to another magistrate judge,

20

pursuant to Local Rule 270(b). ECF No. 29. On March 10, 2014, defendant timely filed a waiver

21

of disqualification. ECF No. 30. However, plaintiff has failed to respond to the court’s order.

22

Plaintiff will therefore be directed to notify the court within ten days from the date of this order

23

whether or not he waives disqualification.

24

On March 17, 2014, plaintiff submitted to the court a March 9, 2014 communication with

25

defendant. ECF No. 31. Plaintiff requests that the court file the communication under seal. Id.

26

The court will construe plaintiff’s request as a motion to seal and will deny the motion.

27
28

Documents may be sealed only by written order of the court, upon the showing required
by applicable law. E.D. Cal. Local Rule 141. Here, plaintiff does not make a showing that his
1

1

request should be sealed as required by applicable law. See Kamakana v. City and County of

2

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (a party seeking to seal a judicial record bears

3

the burden of overcoming a strong presumption in favor of access); Phillips v. General Motors,

4

307 F.3d 1206, 1210, 1213 (9th Cir. 2002) (non-dispositive documents and exhibits may be

5

sealed if the party shows “good cause” for limiting access). For this reason, plaintiff’s motion to

6

seal will be denied. However, the court is cognizant of plaintiff’s desire to keep certain

7

settlement information confidential. Therefore, the Clerk of the Court will be directed to return

8

the documents attached to plaintiff’s March 17, 2014 request.

9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

10

1. Within ten days from the date of this order plaintiff shall inform the court whether he

11

waives disqualification of the undersigned conducting a settlement conference, or whether the

12

settlement conference should be randomly assigned to another magistrate judge;

13

2. Plaintiff’s March 17, 2014 motion to seal, ECF No. 31, is denied; and

14

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the documents attached to plaintiff’s March

15

17, 2014 request to plaintiff.

16

Dated: March 19, 2014.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2