E.E et al v. State of California et al

Filing 84

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL AND FAMILY DECLARATIONS FILED AT DKT. 17 AND 62 granting in part and denying in part 62 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal. (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 1/11/2022)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

E. E., et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8
v.

9
10

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,
Defendants.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 21-cv-07585-SI
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE
UNDER SEAL AND FAMILY
DECLARATIONS FILED AT DKT.
NOS. 17 & 62
Re: Dkt. Nos. 17, 62

12
13
14

Plaintiffs filed an administrative motion to seal the entirety of nine supplemental family

15

declarations. Dkt. No. 62. The Court finds that while it is appropriate to redact the names of the

16

children and their parents (as in Dkt. No. 22), it is not appropriate that the entire declarations be

17

sealed from public view. The Court GRANTS the administrative motion as follows: plaintiffs may

18

file the family declarations with redactions similar to Dkt. No. 22.

19

Further, it has come to the attention of the Court that the family declarations at Dkt. No. 17

20

were filed under seal but not accompanied by an administrative motion to seal. 1 The Court directs

21

plaintiffs to refile those declarations in the public record with redactions similar to Dkt. No. 22.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 11, 2022

24

______________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28

1

The declaration filed at Dkt. No. 22 was also not accompanied by an administrative motion
to seal. The Court instructs the parties to follow Civil Local Rule 79-5 regarding all future proposed
under seal filings.