Plascencia et al v. Lending 1st Mortgage et al
Filing
294
ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS 287 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/1/2011)
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
ARMANDO PLASCENCIA, et al.,
5
6
7
8
9
Plaintiffs,
v.
LENDING 1ST MORTGAGE, et al.,
No. C 07-4485 CW
ORDER GRANTING IN
PART PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO FILE
UNDER SEAL
(Docket No. 287)
Defendants.
________________________________/
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
Plaintiffs Armando and Melania Plascencia move to file under
12
seal certain documents offered in support of their Motion to Amend
13
the Class Certification Order, including their unredacted
14
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of their motion,
15
the Declaration of Michael Quirk, and Exhibits 1 and 2 to the
16
Quirk Declaration, excerpts from the depositions of Janet Gonzalez
17
18
and Mary Haggarty.
Plaintiffs have filed a redacted version of
19
their Memorandum of Points and Authorities in the public record.
20
See Docket No. 286.
21
that the materials that they seek to seal have been “designated
22
‘Confidential’ under the terms of the Stipulated Protective Order
23
and/or contain information from said materials.”
In their motion to seal, Plaintiffs state
Mot., at 2.
24
On November 15, 2011, Defendant EMC filed a declaration in
25
support of Plaintiffs’ motion to seal as to the unredacted
26
27
Memorandum of Points and Authorities and Exhibits 1 and 2 to the
28
Quirk Declaration.
See Declaration of Susan Miller Overby, Docket
1
No. 288.
2
“contain nonpublic, confidential, and proprietary information
3
about the way in which loan documents used by Lending 1st Mortgage
4
for loans it sold to EMC were prepared and by whom, and refer to
5
confidential Seller’s Guides,” and that “public disclosure of this
6
In this declaration, EMC states that these documents
information would cause harm and prejudice to EMC by placing EMC
7
at a competitive disadvantage.”
Id. at ¶ 4.
8
9
Because the public interest favors filing all court documents
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
in the public record, any party seeking to file a document under
11
seal must demonstrate good cause to do so.
12
Creditors Ass'n, 565 F.3d 1106, 1115 (9th Cir. 2009).
13
be established simply by showing that the document is subject to a
14
protective order or by stating in general terms that the material
Pintos v. Pac.
This cannot
15
is considered to be confidential, but rather must be supported by
16
a sworn declaration demonstrating with particularity the need to
17
18
19
file each document under seal.
See Civil L.R. 79-5(a).
No party or non-party has filed a declaration establishing
20
that the Declaration of Michael Quirk is sealable.
21
Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED to the extent that it pertains to the
22
Quirk Declaration itself.
23
Accordingly,
EMC has provided reasons supporting the sealing of the
24
unredacted version of the Memorandum of Points and Authorities and
25
26
Exhibits 1 and 2 to the Quirk Declaration, which Plaintiffs submit
27
in connection with their Motion to Amend the Class Certification
28
Order.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file
2
1
documents under seal is GRANTED to the extent it pertains to these
2
documents.
3
Within four days of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs may
4
electronically file the Quirk Declaration in the public record or
5
may withdraw it, and may file under seal the unredacted version of
6
the Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of their
7
Motion to Amend the Class Certification Order and Exhibits 1 and 2
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
to the Quirk Declaration, in accordance with General Order 62.
Civ. L.R. 79-5(e).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
12
13
14
Dated: 12/1/2011
CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?