Guitron et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al
Filing
116
ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken Granting 60 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2012)
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
YESENIA GUITRON; and JUDI KLOSEK,
5
6
7
Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
TO FILE UNDER SEAL
(Docket No. 60)
v.
8
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; WELLS
FARGO & CO.; PAM RUBIO; and DOES
1-20,
9
Defendants.
10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
No. C 10-3461 CW
________________________________/
11
12
Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo & Co. and Pam
13
Rubio seek to file under seal in conjunction with their motion for
14
summary judgment six documents that Plaintiffs Yesenia Guitron and
15
Judi Klosek have designated as confidential pursuant to the terms
16
of the Protective Order in this case (Docket No. 60).
17
Defendants’ filings are connected to a dispositive motion.
18
19
If a document has been designated as confidential by another
20
party, that party must file a declaration establishing that the
21
document is sealable.
22
the documents are sealable, as the designating party, Plaintiffs
23
“must overcome a strong presumption of access by showing that
24
‘compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings . . .
Civ. Local R. 79-5(d).
To establish that
25
outweigh the general history of access and the public policies
26
favoring disclosure.’”
Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d
27
28
665, 679 (9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted).
This cannot be
1
established simply by showing that the document is subject to a
2
protective order or by stating in general terms that the material
3
is considered to be confidential, but rather must be supported by
4
a sworn declaration demonstrating with particularity the need to
5
file each document under seal.
6
Civ. Local R. 79-5(a).
Plaintiffs have filed a declaration stating that the
7
documents that Defendants seek to file under seal are Plaintiffs’
8
9
personnel records that include performance reviews and records of
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
disciplinary actions taken against Plaintiffs.
11
It further argues that public disclosure would violate Plaintiffs’
12
right to privacy.
13
14
Peretz Decl. ¶ 3.
Plaintiffs have provided sufficient reasons supporting the
sealing of these personnel records.
Accordingly, Defendants’
15
motion for leave to file under seal is GRANTED (Docket No. 60).
16
Within three days of the date of this order, Defendants shall
17
18
electronically file these documents under seal, in accordance with
19
General Order 62.
20
IT IS SO ORDERED.
21
22
23
Dated: 1/3/2012
CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
24
25
26
27
28
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?