Bjork v. County of Placer District Attorney's Office

Filing 104

SEALING ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 11/19/18. The Court has considered the Stipulated Request to Seal Documents Previously Filed (ECF No. 103 ), which seeks to seal previously filed documents in compliance with this Co urt's 1/6/17 Order (ECF No. 74 ). Based on the parties' stipulation, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS this request. The parties are permitted to file and/or re-file the documents identified in the Stipulated Request, and pursuant to Local Rule 141 the Court ORDERS that these documents are hereby filed under permanent SEAL. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Nancy J. Sheehan, SBN 109419
Erin J. Price, SBN 319331
350 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, California 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

Attorneys for Defendant
COUNTY OF PLACER DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

KARIN BJORK,

PORTER | SCOTT

350 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

11
Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15

v.
COUNTY OF PLACER THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY’S OFFICE; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

16
17
18
19

Case No. 2:14-cv-01983-MCE-EFB
Consolidated w/ 2:13-cv-01616-MCE-EFB

Defendants.
___________________________________/
AND CONSOLIDATED ACTION.
___________________________________/

STIPULATED REQUEST TO SEAL
DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY FILED IN
COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
REQUEST TO SEAL EVIDENCE AND
REDACT NAMES, AND AMENDING
THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING
ORDER, AND ORDER

Consolidated Complaint Filed: 5/22/15

20
21

Plaintiff KARIN BJORK (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant COUNTY OF PLACER THE

22

DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (“Defendant”), by and through their respective counsel, hereby

23

agree and stipulate as follows:

24
25
26

1.

On November 21, 2016, Defendant filed a request to seal certain documents and/or

redact various names (ECF No. 68) in its contemplated motion for summary judgment.
2.

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment was thereafter filed on December 1,

27

2016, with unredacted copies provided to the Court and to Plaintiff (ECF No. 69). At the time the

28

Motion was filed, the Court had not yet ruled on the request to seal.
1
STIPULATED REQUEST TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S ORDER
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO SEAL EVIDENCE AND REDACT NAMES, AND AMENDING
THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

{01903904.DOCX}

1

Plaintiff filed her Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on

3.

2

December 22, 2016 (ECF No. 71). Thereafter, she filed an Amended Opposition to Defendant’s

3

Motion for Summary Judgment and Objection to Defendant’s Evidence and Undisputed Facts in

4

support of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, on December 23, 2016 (ECF No. 72 & No.

5

73).

6
7
8

Defendant’s sealing request was granted in part by Order dated January 6, 2017 (ECF

4.
No. 74).
5.

9

The January 6, 2017 Order required the following:
a. Redaction of the names of certain former employees and the sealing of certain

10

evidence relating to the disciplinary actions brought against those employees.

PORTER | SCOTT

350 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

11

b. The sealing of all evidence relating to the performance of another former employee,

12

and redaction of that employee’s name in all papers filed in connection with

13

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

14

c. Redaction of any mention in the evidence of specific medical issues, condition,

15

diagnosis, or specific medication of another former employee. The parties were also

16

ordered to refer to such medical issues and medication in the briefs—if at all—in

17

general terms, without referencing any specific issue, condition, diagnosis, or

18

medication.

19

d. Defendants Request to Seal and Proposed Order, Plaintiff’s Opposition thereto, and

20

Defendant’s Reply, as well as the Order of this Court titled “Sealed Order,” shall be

21

filed under seal.

22

6.

The January 6, 2017 Order additionally granted Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Request and

23

Stipulation to Amend the Pretrial Scheduling Deadlines for the Motion for Summary Judgment

24

Briefing Schedule, extending the deadlines for filing the Motion, Opposition, Cross-Motion, and

25

Reply papers.

26

7.

In accordance with the modified deadlines, the Order required Defendant to file its

27

redacted copy of the pending Motion for Summary Judgment by December 29, 2016, a date that had

28

passed a week beforehand. Rather than applying for an additional extension to correct this
2
STIPULATED REQUEST TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S ORDER
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO SEAL EVIDENCE AND REDACT NAMES, AND AMENDING
THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

{01903904.DOCX}

1
2

discrepancy, Defendant simply filed redacted papers on January 13, 2017 (ECF No. 76).
Plaintiff refiled her Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on

8.

3

January 19, 2017 (ECF No. 87). The refiled Opposition did not include redacted information as

4

required by the Court’s January 6, 2017 Order.

5

9.

Defendant also inadvertently filed papers in connection with its Motion for Summary

6

Judgment that do not contain redactions of the former employee’s name as required by the Court’s

7

January 6, 2017 Order.

8

10.

An attorney representing the former employee in issue has contacted counsel for both

ensure that information regarding that employee is not publicly available on the Court’s docket. The

11

PORTER | SCOTT

parties and requested that the parties take the necessary steps to comply with the Court’s order and

10

350 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

9

parties agree this should be done. Thus, they respectfully request that the Court seal the following

12

documents previously filed by Plaintiff in connection with Defendant’s Motion for Summary

13

Judgment, which are publicly available on the Court’s docket, to comply with the Court’s January

14

6, 2017 Order and to protect the privacy of the former employee:

15

a. Docket Entry No. 71

16

b. Docket Entry No. 71-1

17

c. Docket Entry No. 71-2

18

d. Docket Entry No. 71-3

19

e. Docket Entry No. 71-5

20

f. Docket Entry No. 71-6

21

g. Docket Entry No. 71-7

22

h. Docket Entry No. 71-8

23

i. Docket Entry No. 72

24

j. Docket Entry No. 73

25

k. Docket Entry No. 87-1

26

l. Docket Entry No. 87-2

27

m. Docket Entry No. 87-4

28

n. Docket Entry No. 87-6
3
STIPULATED REQUEST TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S ORDER
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO SEAL EVIDENCE AND REDACT NAMES, AND AMENDING
THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

{01903904.DOCX}

1

o. Docket Entry No. 87-7

2

p. Docket Entry No. 87-9

3

11.

The parties hereby request that the Court seal the following documents previously

4

filed by Defendant in connection with its Motion for Summary Judgment, which are publicly

5

available on the Court’s docket, to comply with the Court’s January 6, 2017 Order and to protect

6

the privacy of the former employee:

7

a. Docket Entry No. 76-2

8

b. Docket Entry No. 78

9

c. Docket Entry No. 90-1

10

12.

The parties hereby request that the Court permit the parties to re-file the above named

PORTER | SCOTT

350 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

11

documents in connection with Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment with all redactions of

12

the former employee’s name performed in compliance with the Court’s January 6, 2017 Order.

13

The documents previously filed by Plaintiff in connection with Defendant’s Motion for

14

Summary Judgment containing all required redactions are attached to this Stipulation as Exhibits 1-

15

16. The documents previously filed by Defendant in connection with its Motion for Summary

16

Judgment containing all required redactions are attached to this Stipulation as Exhibits 17-19.

17
18

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: November 19, 2018

PORTER SCOTT
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

19
20

By /s/ Nancy J. Sheehan
Nancy J. Sheehan
Erin J. Price
Attorneys for Defendant

21
22
23
24

Dated: November 8, 2018

LAW OFFICES OF JILL P. TELFER

25
26

By /s/Jill P. Telfer (as authorized on 11/8/18)
Jill P. Telfer (SBN 145450)
Attorneys for Plaintiff

27
28

4
STIPULATED REQUEST TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S ORDER
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO SEAL EVIDENCE AND REDACT NAMES, AND AMENDING
THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

{01903904.DOCX}

ORDER

1
2
3

The Court has considered the Stipulated Request to Seal Documents Previously Filed (ECF
No. 103), which seeks to seal previously filed documents in compliance with this Court’s January

4

6, 2017 Order (ECF No. 74). Based on the parties’ stipulation, and for good cause shown, the

5

Court GRANTS this request. The parties are permitted to file and/or re-file the documents

6

identified in the Stipulated Request, and pursuant to Local Rule 141 the Court ORDERS that these

7

documents are hereby filed under permanent seal.

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 19, 2018

10

PORTER | SCOTT

350 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
STIPULATED REQUEST TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL IN COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S ORDER
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST TO SEAL EVIDENCE AND REDACT NAMES, AND AMENDING
THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER

{01903904.DOCX}