Gutterglove, Inc. v. Lasell et al

Filing 48

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/31/18 GRANTING IN PART 40 Motion to enforce protective order. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GUTTERGLOVE, INC.,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:17-cv-01372-WBS-CKD

v.

ORDER

WILLIAM LASELL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Presently pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to enforce protective order. (ECF

17
18

No. 40.) Defendants opposed this motion and plaintiff filed a reply. (ECF Nos. 43, 44.) This

19

matter came on regularly for hearing on May 30, 2018, at 10:00 a.m., before the undersigned.

20

Sara Weilert Gillette appeared telephonically on behalf of plaintiff. John P. Costello appeared on

21

behalf of defendants.
After carefully considering the briefing and the oral argument, and for the reasons stated

22
23

on the record at the hearing, plaintiff’s motion to enforce protective order (ECF No. 40) is granted

24

in part.

25
26
27
28

On March 6, 2018, the court approved parties’ stipulated protective order. (ECF No. 29.)
In pertinent part, the protective order provides:
A Party that seeks to file under seal any Protected Material must
comply with Local Civil Rule 141. Protected Material may only be
filed under seal pursuant to a court order authorizing the sealing of
1

the specific Protected Material at issue. If a Party’s request to file
Protected Material under seal is denied by the Court, then the
Receiving Party and Producing Party should work cooperatively,
subject to the requirement that restraint be exercised, to create a
redacted version of the Protected Material or a stipulated summary
of the Protected Material that may be filed in the public record.

1
2
3
4
5

(ECF No. 29 at 15–16.)
Then, on March 15, 2018, defendants sought leave to file their entire first amended answer

6
7

under seal. (ECF No. 30.) United States District Judge William B. Shubb denied defendants’

8

request on March 21, 2018. (ECF No. 33.) Specifically, Judge Shubb ordered that

9

12

defendants’ Request to Seal (Docket No. 30) be, and the same
hereby is, DENIED without prejudice to the right of either party to
submit a more tailored request, such as redacting a portion of the
First Amended Answer and Counterclaims, which specifically
states the basis for sealing or redacting this document and why the
harm of disclosing that information outweighs public policies
favoring disclosure.

13

(ECF No. 33 at 3.) Judge Shubb observed that defendants did “not give specific reasons why any

14

particular information in the First Amended Answer and Counterclaims should be sealed.” (Id. at

15

2.)

10
11

16

As explained on the record, the parties agree that the entire first amended answer and

17

counterclaims should not be sealed. Indeed, plaintiff only seeks redactions from paragraphs 28

18

and 81. Therefore, the court concludes that defendants are bound by the stipulated protective

19

order to work together with plaintiff to craft a more narrowly tailored request to seal.

20

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

21

1. Plaintiff’s motion to enforce protective order (ECF No. 40) is GRANTED IN PART,

22
23

on the terms outlined in this order.
2. Within seven (7) days of this order, parties shall meet and confer in furtherance of the

24

terms of their stipulated protective order (ECF No. 29), in order to craft a more

25

narrowly tailored request to seal portions of the first amended answer and

26

counterclaims, pursuant to the court’s March 21, 2018 order (ECF No. 33).

27
28

3. If the parties cannot reach an agreement on a new request to seal, then plaintiff may
submit a unilateral request to seal portions of the first amended answer and
2

1

counterclaims.

2

4. Once the sealing request is resolved and the first amended answer and counterclaims is

3

filed, plaintiff must provide the required initial discovery within fourteen (14) days.

4

Dated: May 31, 2018

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

5
6
7

14/17-1372.gutterglove.order mot to enf

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3