Labrador v. Seattle Mortgage Company

Filing 91

ORDER by Judge Samuel Conti granting 89 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (sclc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/7/2010)

Download PDF
Labrador v. Seattle Mortgage Company Doc. 91 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MARY LABRADOR, individually and on ) Case No. 08-2270 SC behalf of all others similarly ) situated, ) ORDER RE: ) ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO Plaintiff, ) FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL ) v. ) ) SEATTLE MORTGAGE COMPANY, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Before the Court is an Administrative Motion by Defendant Seattle Mortgage Company ("Defendant") to file documents under seal. ECF No. 89 ("Mot."). Defendant seeks to file under seal IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 portions of its Opposition to Plaintiff Mary Labrador's Motion to Certify the Class, as well as a declaration and an exhibit in support of its Opposition. Motion.1 The Court finds that Defendant's Motion complies with Civil Local Rule 79-5 and General Order 62. Defendant has supported its Id. Plaintiff has not opposed this Motion with a declaration candidly discussing why these documents This is Defendant's second motion to file these documents under seal. ECF No. 83. The Court denied Defendant's earlier motion, finding that Defendant had failed to establish that the documents were entitled to protection under the law and that Defendant's proposed sealing order was too broad. ECF No. 87. The Court gave Defendant two days to refile the motion. Id. Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 For the Northern District of California should be filed under seal. Hassen Decl. 4-5.2 The Court also finds the scope of Defendant's proposed sealing order to be narrowly tailored: Defendant seeks to protect some, but not all, of the documents, and it has identified the specific language it seeks to keep confidential by lodging with the Court suggested redacted versions of each document. For these reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion. following documents shall be filed under seal: Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Certify the Class; The declaration supporting Defendant's Opposition; and Exhibit B attached to the declaration supporting Defendant's Opposition. Defendant shall publicly e-file versions of the documents with redaction consistent with the redacted versions submitted to the Court. Defendant shall also file under seal unredacted versions of Due to the nature of the documents, the sealing The United States District Court 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 the documents. order shall be temporary: documents shall be sealed for ninety (90) days from the date of this Order, at which point they will be unsealed. Defendant may petition the Court for a continuance of this Order if it believes one is required. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 7, 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Michael Hassen, counsel for Defendant, filed under seal a declaration in support of the Motion. ECF No. 89-1. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?