Abstrax, Inc. v. Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Filing
227
ORDER requiring Plaintiff Abstrax, Inc. to file a motion to seal 226 its opposition to Defendant's motion for a protective order by close of business Monday, June 6, 2011. Signed by Judge Nandor J. Vadas on June 2, 2011. (njvlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/2/2011)
1
2
NOT FOR CITATION
3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
EUREKA DIVISION
6
7
8
United States District Court
United States District Court
For For the Northern DistrictCalifornia
the Northern District of of California
11
ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO
SEAL PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A
PROTECTIVE ORDER
Plaintiff,
9
10
No. CV 09-5243 PJH (NJV)
ABSTRAX, INC.,
v.
SUN MICROSYSTEMS, INC.,
Defendant.
12
(Docket No. 226)
/
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
The district court has referred the parties’ discovery motions and all future discovery matters
to this Court for determination. Doc. No. 215. On May 27, 2011, Plaintiff filed a redacted
opposition to Defendant’s motion for a protective order, but did not file a corresponding motion to
seal its opposition as required by Local Rule 79-5(c). Doc. No. 226. Plaintiff is ordered to file its
motion to seal by close of business Monday, June 6, 2011. To the extent that the subject matter to
be sealed in Plaintiff’s opposition was addressed in Plaintiff’s motion to seal portions of its motion
for sanctions (Doc. No. 220), the parties are instructed to clearly identify the overlap. The parties
are instructed to carefully review the Local Rules and General Order 62 regarding the sealing of
documents.
23
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 2, 2011
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge
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?