Alegrett et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 33

ORDER by Judge Maria-Elena James granting in part and denying in part 31 Administrative Motion. Motion is granted as to request to exceed page limit. Motion is denied without prejudice as to request to file entire document under seal. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

Northern District of California

6
7

EDUARDO ENRIQUE ALEGRETT,
Plaintiff,

8
v.
9

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
et al.,

11

ORDER RE: REQUEST TO EXCEED
PAGE LIMIT AND FILE UNDER
SEAL

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

(Dkt. No. 31)

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

No. C 12-5538 MEJ

13

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion to File Joint Discovery Dispute

14 Letter Under Seal and to Exceed Page Limit. Dkt. No. 31. Plaintiff’s request to exceed the page
15 limit is GRANTED, but only for the referenced dispute and not for any future disputes.
16

As to Plaintiff’s request to file the entire letter under seal, he has failed to establish good

17 cause. The legal standard in this area is provided by Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447
18 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir.2006) and Civil Local Rule 79-5. In Kamakana, the Ninth Circuit held it is a
19 general rule that documents filed with a court must be open to public inspection, so the people and
20 the media can monitor court activity. Id. at 1178. Nonetheless, a narrow range of documents have
21 traditionally been exempt from this rule for public policy reasons, such as grand jury transcripts and
22 warrant materials in the midst of a pre-indictment investigation. Id. A party must show good cause
23 exists to seal. Id. at 1179-80.
24

In addition, Civil Local Rule 79-5(b) states:

25

(b) Request to File Entire Document Under Seal. Counsel seeking to file an entire
document under seal must:

26
27

(1) File and serve an Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, in
conformance with Civil L.R. 7-11, accompanied by a declaration establishing
that the entire document is sealable;

28
(2) Lodge with the Clerk and serve a proposed order sealing the document;

1
2
3
4

(3) Lodge with the Clerk and serve the entire document, contained in an 8 ½inch by 11-inch sealed envelope or other suitable sealed container, with a cover
sheet affixed to the envelope or container, setting out the information required
by Civil L.R. 3-4(a) and (b) and prominently displaying the notation:
“DOCUMENT SUBMITTED UNDER SEAL”;
(4) Lodge with the Clerk for delivery to the Judge’s chambers a second copy
of the entire document, in an identical labeled envelope or container.

5
6 N.D. Cal. L.R. 79-5(b).
7

Here, Plaintiff has not provided the Court with a copy of the letter, so it is unable to determine

8 whether good cause exists to seal the entire letter. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request to file under seal
9 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff shall re-submit the request in compliance with Rule
10 79-5. Plaintiff should be mindful that even if there are portions of a document that should be filed

12 document that can be filed in the public record. Thus, to avoid having the renewed motion denied as
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11 under seal, it is preferable that a document be filed under Rule 79-5(c), with a redacted version of the

13 overbroad, Plaintiff may wish to submit the letter under 79-5(c) instead of 79-5(b).
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16 Dated: August 28, 2013
_______________________________
Maria-Elena James
United States Magistrate Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2