Konig v. State Bar of California et al

Filing 215

ORDER GRANTING NON-PARTY PHILIP E. KAY'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME; SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING DATE ON MOTION TO UNSEAL. Any opposition or response to the Motion to Unseal shall be filed no later than Monday, March 2, 2009. Kay's reply shall be filed no later than Friday, March 6, 2009, by 4:00 p.m. The Court will conduct a hearing on Friday, March 13, 2009, at 9:00 a.m.Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on February 25, 2009. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/25/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Before the Court is non-party Philip E. Kay's ("Kay") Motion to Shorten Time, filed February 18, 2009, by which he seeks an order shortening time for hearing of his motion "for Leave to Intervene and to Unseal Records" ("Motion to Unseal"), also filed February 18, 2009. Defendants State Bar of California, Lawrence J. Dal Cerro, Russell Weiner, Allen Blumenthal, and Robert Hawley have filed opposition to the Motion to Shorten Time. Plaintiff Alan Konig has not filed a response. Having read and considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the Motion to Shorten Time, the Court rules as follows. Good cause appearing, the Motion to Shorten Time is hereby GRANTED, and the Court sets the following briefing schedule and hearing date: 1. Any opposition or response to the Motion to Unseal shall be filed no later than Monday, March 2, 2009. 2. Kay's reply shall be filed no later than Friday, March 6, 2009, by 4:00 p.m. v. LAWRENCE J. DAL CERRO, et al., Defendants / ALAN KONIG, Plaintiff, No. C-04-2210 MJJ ORDER GRANTING NON-PARTY PHILIP E. KAY'S MOTION TO SHORTEN TIME; SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING DATE ON MOTION TO UNSEAL United States District Court IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

3. The Court will conduct a hearing on Friday, March 13, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. In briefing the matter, the parties, as to each of the sealed documents identified in Exhibit A to Kay's Motion to Unseal, should focus on whether or not "compelling reasons supported by specific fact[s] . . . outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure." See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation and citation omitted). Any issue pertaining to whether the material sought by Kay is or may be discoverable or admissible in Kay's pending State Bar proceeding should be directed to the appropriate state forum. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 25, 2009

MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge

2