Zeisel v. Diamond Foods, Inc.

Filing 147

ORDER Regarding Administrative Motion to Seal Diamond Foods, Inc.'s Objections to New Evidence. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on June 2, 2011. (jswlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/2/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

ELLIOT ZEISEL, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated,

No. C 10-01192 JSW

10

ORDER REGARDING
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
SEAL DIAMOND FOODS, INC.’S
OBJECTIONS TO NEW
EVIDENCE

11
v.
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

Plaintiffs,
12
13

DIAMOND FOODS, INC., a Delaware
corporation,

14

Defendant.

(Docket No. 128)
/

15
16

On May 6, 2011, Diamond Foods, Inc. filed an administrative motion to seal its

17

objections to new evidence submitted in connection with Plaintiff’s reply brief in support of his

18

motion for class certification. That motion seeks to seal certain portions of objections

19

addressing the Rebuttal Declaration of Gary French.

20

On May 9, 2011, this Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part

21

Plaintiff’s motion to seal portions of his reply brief and the French Declaration. (See Docket

22

No. 132.) In that Order, the Court determined that certain portions of the French Declarations

23

were not sealable, but its ruling was without prejudice to Diamond making a further showing as

24

to why those portions were, in fact, “sealable,” by no later than May 13, 2011. To date,

25

Diamond has not made a renewed request to seal those portions of the reply brief and the

26

French Declaration, which impacts the Court’s ruling on the instant motion.

27

//

28

//

1

Upon further review, the Court is inclined to revisit its ruling granting in part Plaintiff’s

2

motion to seal portions of its reply brief. Accordingly, Diamond is HEREBY ORDERED to

3

show cause as to why page 15, lines 14-17 and page 16, line 27 is sealable. Diamond shall also

4

be given on further opportunity to show why page 16, line 28 and page 17 line 1 of Plaintiff’s

5

reply brief contains sealable material. In addition, Diamond is HEREBY ORDERED to show

6

cause why the Court should seal the portions of its objections to Plaintiff’s additional evidence,

7

which it has redacted.

8

Diamond’s response to this Order to Show Cause shall be due by no later than June 8,

9

2011, and it shall provide responses that are specific to each page and line of the Reply Brief,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

the French Declaration, and the Objections that it seeks to seal.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 2, 2011
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2