Asis Internet Services et al v. Suscriberbase Inc et al

Filing 41

ORDER by Judge Samuel Conti denying 40 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/1/2010)

Asis Internet Services et al v. Suscriberbase Inc et al

Doc. 41

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. SUBSCRIBERBASE, et al., Defendants. ASIS INTERNET SERVICES, et al., Plaintiffs, ) Case No. 09-3503 SC ) ) ORDER RE: ) ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION ) ) ) ) ) ) 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

Before the Court is an Administrative Motion by Defendants Subscriberbase, et al. ("Defendants") to file documents under seal. ECF No. 40 ("Admin. Mot.") Defendants seek to file under seal

portions of documents produced in discovery by Plaintiff Asis Internet Services ("Asis"), as well as portions of Defendants' Opposition to Asis's Motion to Dismiss all Defendants, ECF No. 38 ("Opp'n"), which references these documents. Admin. Mot. at 2.

While there is a protective order in place in this action, ECF No. 32, these documents were not designated as confidential by Asis when it produced them. Admin. Mot. at 2. Defendants seek to file

these documents under seal because they "contain[] banking and finance information for ASIS and its principal Nella White," and "ASIS or Nella White may consider this information Confidential." Id. ///

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
For the Northern District of California

Civil Local Rule 79-5(d) provides the procedure for filing under seal documents designated confidential by another party. Under this rule, the moving party must file an administrative motion with the court. The designating party then has seven days

to preserve the documents' confidentiality by filing and serving a "declaration establishing that the designated information is sealable" and "a narrowly tailored proposed sealing order." Id.

Asis did not designate these documents as confidential, nor did it file a responsive declaration or sealing order. For these

reasons, Defendants' Administrative Motion to file the documents and its Opposition under seal is DENIED. Pursuant to Civil Local

United States District Court

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

Rule 79-5(e), Defendants shall retain the documents and its Opposition and not make them part of the record in the case, or, within four days, re-submit unredacted versions of the documents and Opposition for filing in the public record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 1, 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2