Plascencia et al v. Lending 1st Mortgage et al

Filing 313


Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 5 6 ARMANDO PLASCENCIA; and MELANIA PLASCENCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL (Docket No. 306) Plaintiffs, 7 8 No. C 07-4485 CW v. LENDING 1ST MORTGAGE; LENDING 1ST MORTGAGE, LLC; EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION; and DOES 1-10, Defendants. ________________________________/ Plaintiffs Armando and Melania Plascencia move to file under 14 seal their unredacted Reply to Defendant EMC Mortgage 15 16 Corporation’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Second Motion to Amend the 17 Class Certification Order. 18 version of their Memorandum of Points and Authorities in the 19 public record. 20 Plaintiffs state that the materials that they seek to seal have 21 been “designated ‘Confidential’ under the terms of the Stipulated 22 Plaintiffs have filed a redacted See Docket No. 305. In their motion to seal, Protective Order and/or contain information from said materials.” 23 Mot., at 1. 24 25 On December 22, 2011, Defendant EMC filed a declaration in See Declaration of Susan Miller 26 support of the motion to seal. 27 Overby, Docket No. 288. 28 nonpublic, confidential, and proprietary information about the way EMC states that these documents “contain 1 in which loan documents used by Lending 1st Mortgage for loans it 2 sold to EMC were prepared and by whom, and refer to confidential 3 Seller’s Guides,” and that “public disclosure of this information 4 would expose EMC’s otherwise nonpublic, confidential, and 5 proprietary practices, and would likely cause harm and prejudice 6 to EMC by placing EMC at a competitive disadvantage.” Id. at ¶ 4. 7 Because the public interest favors filing all court documents 8 9 in the public record, any party seeking to file a document under United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 seal must demonstrate good cause to do so. Pintos v. Pac. 11 Creditors Ass'n, 565 F.3d 1106, 1115 (9th Cir. 2009). 12 be established simply by showing that the document is subject to a 13 protective order or by stating in general terms that the material 14 is considered to be confidential, but rather must be supported by This cannot 15 a sworn declaration demonstrating with particularity the need to 16 file each document under seal. See Civil L.R. 79-5(a). 17 18 EMC demonstrated good cause supporting the sealing of the 19 unredacted version of Plaintiff’s reply. 20 motion for leave to file documents under seal is GRANTED (Docket 21 No. 306). 22 may file under seal their unredacted Reply, in accordance with 23 Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Within four days of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs General Order 62. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 27 28 Dated: 12/23/2011 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 2

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?