Ashker et al v. Schwarzenegger et al

Filing 720

Order by Magistrate Judge Nandor J. Vadas granting 699 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal.(njvlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/21/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

EUREKA DIVISION

7
8

TODD ASHKER, et al.,

Case No. 09-cv-05796-CW (NJV)

Plaintiffs,
9

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS'
MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
MOTION TO COMPEL

v.
10
11

MATHEW CATE, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 699

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13
14

The court has received Plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, and the

15

Declaration of Carmen E. Bremer in support of the same. (Doc. 699.) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule

16

79-5(a), Plaintiffs have shown that the portions of the documents to be sealed are entitled to

17

protection under the law because they contain confidential information that Defendants claim

18

could harm CDCR institutional safety and security if disclosed. See Dugan v. Lloyds TSB Bank,

19

PLC, No. 12-cv-02549-WHA (NJV), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51162, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 9,

20

2013) (finding that good cause may exist to seal records “if disclosure of the information might

21

harm a litigant’s competitive standing”).

22

Plaintiffs have met the “good cause” standard for sealing portions of Plaintiffs’ Motion to

23

Compel Production of Disciplinary Documents (Doc. 702), as well as Exhibits A and B thereto

24

and Plaintiffs’ proposed order granting the same, because Plaintiffs have shown that they contain

25

confidential information that Defendants claim would harm institutional safety and security, and

26

would further compromise ongoing investigations of alleged prison gang activity if disclosed. See

27

Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006).

28

Having considered Plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion to File Under Seal and the

1

Declaration of Carmen E. Bremer in support of same, and good cause appearing therefor,

2

Plaintiffs’ Motion is hereby GRANTED.

3
4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 21, 2017
______________________________________
NANDOR J. VADAS
United States Magistrate Judge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2