Plascencia et al v. Lending 1st Mortgage et al

Filing 366

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS 350 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/20/2012)

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,
Plaintiffs,

7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

v.
LENDING 1ST MORTGAGE; LENDING 1ST
MORTGAGE, LLC; EMC MORTGAGE
CORPORATION; and DOES 1-10,

No. C 07-4485 CW
ORDER GRANTING IN
PART AND DENYING
IN PART
PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO FILE
UNDER SEAL
(Docket No. 350)

Defendants.
________________________________/
On July 2, 2012, Plaintiffs Armando and Melania Plascencia

13
moved to file under seal their unredacted motion for summary
14
judgment and Exhibits A through K to the declaration of Mark R.
15
Cuker in support of their motion for summary judgment.

Plaintiffs

16
have filed a redacted version of their motion for summary judgment
17
in the public record.

See Docket No. 349.

In their motion to

18
seal, Plaintiffs state that the materials that they seek to seal
19
have been “designated ‘Confidential’ under the terms of the
20
Stipulated Protective Order and/or contain information from said
21
materials.”

Mot. at 2.

Plaintiffs represent that they do not

22
believe that the information in Exhibits A through K is sealable.
23
Berns Decl. ¶ 4.
24
On July 9, 2012, Defendant EMC Mortgage LLC, formerly known
25
as EMC Mortgage Corporation, filed a declaration in support of the
26
motion to seal.
27
28

See Overbey Decl., Docket No. 354.

EMC withdraws

1

its confidentiality designation for Exhibits B, C, and E through

2

J.

Overbey Decl. ¶ 4.

3

are internal EMC documents or documents produced by EMC
in this case containing confidential borrower
information regarding Plaintiffs, including their loan
number, credit scores, loan amount, and details
regarding their loan terms, and confidential information
regarding the class members, including their names, loan
amounts, and details and data regarding their loans,
which is [sic] protected by federal law under the GrammLeach-Bliley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 6801(a); 17 C.F.R.
§ 248.3(t)(1)(i)-(ii) & (u)(2)(i)(C), and by California
law.

4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

EMC states that Exhibits A, D and K

Id. at ¶ 5.

EMC asks that these exhibits and the portions of

Plaintiffs’ motion that refer to them be placed under seal.

11

Id.

Plaintiffs’ filings are connected to a dispositive motion.

12

Because Defendants designated the documents at issue as

13

confidential, they must file a declaration establishing that the

14

documents are sealable.

15

Defendants “must overcome a strong presumption of access by

16

showing that ‘compelling reasons supported by specific factual

17

findings . . . outweigh the general history of access and the

18

public policies favoring disclosure.’”

19

Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 679 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted).

20

cannot be established simply by showing that the document is

21

subject to a protective order or by stating in general terms that

22

the material is considered to be confidential, but rather must be

23

supported by a sworn declaration demonstrating with particularity

24

the need to file each document under seal.

25

5(a).

26

Civil Local Rule 79-5(d).

To do so,

Pintos v. Pac. Creditors
This

Civil Local Rule 79-

Exhibits A and K contain information concerning Plaintiffs’

27

loan only and not that of absent class members.

28

cited authority prevents Defendants from disclosing this
2

Although the

1

information publicly without Plaintiffs’ consent, EMC cites no

2

authority or compelling reason that would prevent Plaintiffs from

3

publicly disclosing this information themselves.

4

voluntarily offered these exhibits into evidence and do not

5

support filing them under seal.

6

Plaintiffs have

EMC has established compelling reasons to support the sealing

7

of Exhibit D and references in the motion thereto.

8

contains personally identifiable financial information of absent

9

class members, including their names and loan amounts.

This exhibit

The motion

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

contains descriptions of class members based on this exhibit.

11

17 C.F.R. § 248.3(t)(1)(ii) (defining “nonpublic personal

12

information” to include “any . . . description . . . of consumers

13

. . . that is derived using any personally identifiable financial

14

information that is not publicly available information”).

15

See

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file documents

16

under seal is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part (Docket No. 350).

17

Within four days of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs shall file

18

their unredacted motion and Exhibit D to the Cuker declaration

19

under seal and Exhibits A through C and E through K to the Cuker

20

declaration in the public record.

21

also refile their redacted motion for summary judgment, removing

22

any redactions related to Exhibits A through C and E through K to

23

the Cuker declaration.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

By that date, Plaintiffs shall

25
26
27

Dated:

7/20/2012

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge

28
3