Benton v. Clarity Services, Inc.

Filing 70

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFERRED PORTION OF DEFENDANT'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL; DIRECTIONS TO DEFENDANT. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on 01/29/2018. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2018)

1
2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

JOYCE BENTON,
Plaintiff,

6
7
8

Case No. 16-cv-06583-MMC

v.
CLARITY SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant.

9

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
DEFERRED PORTION OF
DEFENDANT'S ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO SEAL; DIRECTIONS TO
DEFENDANT
Re: Dkt. No. 64

10
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

By order filed January 10, 2018, the court granted in part and deferred ruling in
12

part on defendant Clarity Services, Inc.’s (“Clarity”) “Administrative Motion to Seal,” and,

13
with respect to the deferred portion thereof, afforded Clarity leave to file supplemental
14
declaration(s).
15
16

On January 24, 2018, Clarity filed a Response to the Court’s Order, in which it
“withdraws its request to seal” the information as to which the Court had deferred ruling.

17
(See Response at 1:10-11.)
18
Accordingly, (1) to the extent Clarity initially sought an order sealing that additional
19

information, Clarity’s administrative motion is hereby DENIED as moot; and (2) Clarity is

20
hereby DIRECTED to file, no later than January 31, 2018, its redacted exhibits as
21
22

attachments to a separate document titled “Redacted Exhibits H, J, K, T, U, V to the
Declaration of Sean Dunham in Support of Clarity Services, Inc.’s Motion for Summary

23
Judgment.”
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26
Dated: January 29, 2018
27
28

MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge