Yordy v. Plimus, Inc et al

Filing 141

ORDER Lifting Suspension; and Granting in Part 134 Joint Administrative Motion to File Under Seal filed by Plimus, Inc.; Motion Hearing on Plaintiff's Renewed Motion for Class Certification set for 3/3/2014 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 2, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Thelton E. Henderson. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 1/30/14. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2014)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

KIMBERLY YORDY,

5

Plaintiff,

6

v.

7

PLIMUS, INC.,

8

Defendant.

9
10

Case No. 12-cv-00229-TEH
ORDER LIFTING SUSPENSION OF
PROCEEDINGS; GRANTING IN
PART PARTIES’ JOINT
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
AND SETTING A HEARING DATE
FOR PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED
MOTION FOR CLASS
CERTIFICATION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

On January 27, 2014, the parties came before the Court on an order to show cause

13

why sanctions should not issue for their failure to comply with the Court’s order requiring

14

them to file a joint administrative motion to file documents under seal. After hearing the

15

parties’ explanations, the Court ordered that all activity in the case would be suspended

16

until the parties’ counsel submitted declarations stating, under penalty of perjury, that they

17

had read the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local Rules for the Northern

18

District of California, along with the Court’s Standing Order. On January 28, 2014,

19

counsel for both parties submitted declarations stating that they had read all the relevant

20

rules. Accordingly, the Court lifts the suspension on proceedings, but reserves ruling on

21

the issue of sanctions pending parties’ compliance with the applicable rules for the

22

duration of the case.

23

The Court finds that there are two matters requiring a decision in this case. The

24

first is the parties’ joint administrative motion to seal documents, filed on January 13,

25

2014. In it, the parties request the sealing of Plaintiff’s Exhibits 41 and 42, filed with her

26

renewed motion for class certification. They argue that the exhibits describe a proprietary

27

program unique to Defendant Plimus, Inc. (“Plimus”) that qualifies as a trade secret. The

28

Court agrees and orders that they be sealed. See Civil Local Rule 79-5 (permitting the

1
2

sealing of documents that qualify as trade secrets).
The parties also request the sealing of portions of Plaintiff’s Exhibits 5, 44, and 46,

3

insofar as they reveal financial information of third-parties not at issue in this litigation. At

4

the January 27, 2014 hearing, the Court questioned Plaintiff’s need to submit these exhibits

5

if they were irrelevant to the matters at issue in this litigation. Plaintiff requested

6

additional time to review those exhibits, which the Court granted. On January 28, 2014,

7

Plaintiff submitted a statement confirming that she still sought to submit Exhibits 5 and 44

8

under seal, but that she was withdrawing Exhibit 46 entirely. In light of Plaintiff’s

9

statement, the Court does not consider the sealability of Exhibit 46 as it has been
withdrawn. As for Exhibits 5 and 44, the Court agrees that to the extent the documents

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

reveal third-party financial information which Plimus is obligated to protect, those portions

12

of the exhibits may be sealed. Accordingly, by no later than Wednesday, February 5,

13

2014, Plaintiff is directed to file a revised renewed motion for class certification along with

14

any accompanying exhibits, which comports with this order, and also reflects any

15

withdrawn exhibits and withdrawn requests to seal as stated in the parties’ joint

16

administrative motion.

17

The second matter before the court is Plaintiff’s renewed motion for class

18

certification, which will be fully briefed and properly before the Court upon Plaintiff’s

19

submission of a revised renewed motion. The Court shall hold a hearing on the motion on

20

Monday, March 3, 2014 at 10:00 AM.

21
22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24
25

Dated: 1/30/14

_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

26
27
28

2