Germano v. Aimmune Therapeutics, Inc. et al

Filing 221

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTYS MATERIAL SHOULD BE SEALED IN CONNECTION WITH COLEAD PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on September 26, 2024. (mmclc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2024)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8

IN RE AIMMUNE THERAPEUTICS,
INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER
PARTY’S MATERIAL SHOULD BE
SEALED IN CONNECTION WITH COLEAD PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DIRECTIONS
TO PLAINTIFFS

9
10
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 20-cv-06733-MMC

12
13
14
15

Before the Court is plaintiffs’ “Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another

16

Party’s Material Should Be Sealed,” filed August 5, 2024 (Doc. No. 188 (“Administrative

17

Motion”)), whereby plaintiffs seek to file under seal the following materials, which,

18

plaintiffs state, have been designated as confidential by other parties: (1) portions of “Co-

19

Lead Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants’

20

Motion for Summary Judgment” (Doc. No. 198); and (2) exhibits attached to the

21

“Declaration of Juan E. Monteverde in Support of Co-Lead Plaintiffs’ Opposition to

22

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment” (Doc. No. 190 ("Monteverde Declaration")).

23

In support of sealing, defendants and non-party BofA Securities, Inc. have filed

24

responses to the Administrative Motion.

25
26
27
28

The Court having read and considered the above-referenced submissions, the
Administrative Motion is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:
1. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal portions of
“Co-Lead Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants’

1

Motion for Summary Judgment,” the Administrative Motion is GRANTED as to the text

2

highlighted in yellow on page 2 and pages 23-25 of Attachment 2 to the “Declaration of

3

Christine McInerney in Support of Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another

4

Party’s Materials Should Be Sealed in Connection With Co-Lead Plaintiffs’ Opposition to

5

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment” (see Doc. No. 204-2).

6

United States District Court
Northern District of California

7

In all other respects, the Administrative Motion is DENIED,” the designating parties
not having sought to have other portions sealed.

8

2. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal the

9

deposition transcript of William Jeffers (April 23, 2024) (Monteverde. Decl. Attachment 8,

10

Doc. No. 188-8), the administrative motion is GRANTED as to the following page and line

11

numbers:

12



63:6-7

13



63:13-15

14



63:17-21

15



64:2-8

16



103:24-25

17



204:24-205:8

18



205:18-20

19



209:21-24

20



210:4-5

21



214:4-12

22



214:18-21

23



215:6-10

24



215:21-22

25



216:5-6

26



216:12-15

27



217:9-14

28



217:18-19
2

United States District Court
Northern District of California

1



217:24-218:2

2



218:13-15

3



218:19-219:2

4



219:5-8

5



220:5

6



220:21-24

7



221:3-4

8



221:15-17

9



223:8-10

10



227:9

11



227:15

12



227:25

13



228:6-14

14



228:19-20

15



229:3-4

16



229:6

17



229:22-23

18



232:22

19



233:3

20



233:11-12

21



233:14-16

22



235:9-11

23



238:9-239:1

24



239:16-20

25



267:3-4

26



267:19-23

27



268:2-11

28



282:21-283:3.
3

1
2

United States District Court
Northern District of California

3

In all other respects, the Administrative Motion is DENIED, the designating parties
not having sought to have other portions sealed.
3. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal the

4

deposition transcript of William Thiessen (January 24, 2024) (Monteverde. Decl.

5

Attachment 9, Doc. No. 188-9), the Administrative Motion is GRANTED as to the

6

following page and line numbers:

7



10:1-2

8



37:17-18

9



37:21

10



38:5-6 (“Nestle” to “correct”).

11

In all other respects, the Administrative Motion is DENIED, the designating parties

12

not having sought to have portions sealed.

13

4. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal Exhibit 52

14

to the Monteverde Declaration (Doc. No. 188-2), the Administrative Motion is GRANTED

15

as to the following:

16



the text highlighted in yellow in Attachment 3 of the “Declaration of Christine

17

Mcinerney in Support of Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another

18

Party’s Materials Should Be Sealed in Connection With Co-Lead Plaintiffs’

19

Opposition to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment” (see Doc. No. 204-

20

3);

21



the text highlighted in yellow in Attachment 2 of “Non-Party BofA Securities,

22

Inc.’s Administrative Motion to Redact Certain Personal and Confidential

23

Information in Non-Party Productions” (see Doc. No. 207-2).

24
25

In all other respects, the Administrative Motion is DENIED, the designating parties
not having sought to have other portions sealed.

26

5. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal Exhibit 78

27

to the Monteverde Declaration (Doc. No. 188-3), the Administrative Motion is GRANTED.

28

6. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal Exhibit 86
4

United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

to the Monteverde Declaration (Doc. No. 188-4), the Administrative Motion is GRANTED.

2

7. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal Exhibit 92

3

to the Monteverde Declaration (Doc. No. 188-5), the Administrative Motion is GRANTED.

4

8. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal Exhibit 99

5

to the Monteverde Declaration (Doc. No.188-6), the Administrative Motion is GRANTED.

6

9. To the extent the Administrative Motion seeks leave to file under seal the

7

February 23, 2024 Expert Report of William Jeffers, CFA (Monteverde Decl. Ex. K, Doc.

8

No. 188-7, the administrative motion is GRANTED as to the following:

9



pages 20-22, paras. 78-84

10



page 26, para. 99 (“As” to “place.”)

11



page 26, para. 100 (“Both” to “2020.”)

12



page 44, para. 164 (“Nestle’s” to “and”)

13



page 45, para. 165 (“Nestle” to “Aimmune.”).

14

In all other respects, the Administrative Motion is DENIED, the designating parties

15
16
17
18
19

not having sought to have other portions sealed.
Plaintiffs are hereby DIRECTED to file in the public record, no later than fourteen
days from the date of this order revised redacted versions of:
a. “Co-Lead Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment”;

20

b. the deposition transcript of William Jeffers;

21

c. the deposition transcript of William Thiessen;

22

d. Exhibit 52 to the Monteverde Declaration;

23

e. the Expert Report of William Jeffers.

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27

Dated: September 26, 2024
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

28
5