Singh v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 36

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES 34 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 5/10/2013)

1
2
3
4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
No. C 12-6566 SI

JAMES SINGH,
8

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF
ATTORNEYS’ FEES

Plaintiff,
9

v.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

WELLS FARGO BANK,

11

Defendant.
/

12
13

On May 7, 2013, defendant filed a motion for an award of attorneys’ fees. Pursuant to Civil

14

Local Rule 7-1(b), the matter is appropriate for resolution without oral argument. In support of the

15

motion, defendant attached redacted documents without obtaining prior approval from the Court to file

16

these documents under seal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c); Civil L. R. 79-5. It is the Court, not defendant

17

Wells Fargo, which decides whether documents should be sealed from the public. Civil L. R. 79-5(a);

18

see also Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). In this Court,

19

documents may be filed under seal only upon the granting of an administrative motion to seal as set

20

forth in Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5. Defendant’s motion does not comply with these rules.

21

Therefore, the Court will not consider it. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53

22

(9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.”).

23

Accordingly, the Court DENIES defendant’s motion WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27
28

Dated: May 10 , 2013
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge