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)

Download PDF
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?