City of Oakland v. SSA Terminals, LLC et al
Filing
151
STIPULATION AND ORDER; Exhibits C and E to the White Declaration remain locked pending the outcome of the related motion to seal. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/17/13. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2013)
1
2
3
4
DANNY WEI WAN #168323
PORT ATTORNEY
DONNELL CHOY #85458
DEPUTY PORT ATTORNEY
PORT OF OAKLAND
530 Water Street, 4th Floor
Oakland, California 94607
Telephone: (510) 627-1346
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
RICHARD T. WHITE #58622
J. BRITTAIN HABEGGER #57192
FITZGERALD ABBOTT & BEARDSLEY LLP
1221 Broadway, 21st Floor
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: (510) 451-3300
Facsimile: (510) 451-1527
Email: rwhite@fablaw.com; bhabegger@fablaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff City of Oakland,
A Municipal Corporation, Acting By and
Through Its Board of Port Commissioners
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15
16
CITY OF OAKLAND, a Municipal
Corporation, Acting By and Through Its
Board of Port Commissioners
Plaintiff,
17
18
19
20
21
22
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION TO REMOVE EXHIBITS
C AND E TO THE WHITE
DECLARATION FROM THE PUBLIC
DOCKET, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
vs.
SSA TERMINALS, LLC, SSA TERMINALS
(OAKLAND), LLC and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive,
Defendant.
SSA TERMINALS, LLC; SSA TERMINALS
(OAKLAND), LLC,
Counterclaimants,
23
24
CASE NO.: C11-01446 YGR
vs.
CITY OF OAKLAND and Does 1 through 10,
Counter-Defendants.
1.
STIPULATION TO REMOVE EXHIBITS C AND E TO THE WHITE DECLARATION
FROM THE PUBLIC DOCKET, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO.: C11-01446
YGR
4/17/13 (27492) #515472.1
1
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant City of Oakland, a Municipal Corporation, Acting
2
By and Through its Board of Port Commissioners (the “Port”), and Defendants and
3
Counter-Claimants SSA Terminals, LLC, and SSA Terminals (Oakland), LLC (“SSAT”)
4
hereby stipulate as follows:
5
WHEREAS SSAT has designated the documents attached as Exhibits C and E to
6
the Declaration of Richard T. White in Support of Plaintiff and Counterdefendant’s
7
Motions in Limine 1-5 (“White Declaration”) (Docket No. 142) as “Highly Confidential”
8
and “Attorney’s Eyes Only”, pursuant to the Protective Order in this case;
9
10
11
12
WHEREAS on April 12, 2013, the Port inadvertently filed Exhibits C and E to the
White Declaration in the Court’s docket, which is open to public view;
WHEREAS on April 15, 2013, the Port filed its Administrative Motion to File
Under Seal (Docket No. 147) as to Exhibits C and E to the White Declaration;
13
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES that
14
Exhibits C and E to the White Declaration be removed from the Court’s docket, pending
15
the Court’s ruling on the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal.
16
Respectfully,
17
18
Dated: April ____, 2013
19
FITZGERALD ABBOTT & BEARDSLEY LLP
By
Richard T. White
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant
20
21
22
Dated: April ____, 2013
23
RUSSELL, MIRKOVICH & MORROW
By
Joseph N. Mirkovich
Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants
SSA Terminals, LLC and SSA Terminals
(Oakland), LLC
24
25
26
27
28
2.
STIPULATION TO REMOVE EXHIBITS C AND E TO THE WHITE DECLARATION
FROM THE PUBLIC DOCKET, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO.: C11-01446
YGR
4/17/13 (27492) #515472.1
ORDER
1
2
The parties’ request is DENIED to the extent that docket entries cannot be
3
“removed” from the Court’s docket. The Court understands the documents at issue have
4
already been locked at the request of the parties, such that they are not publicly-available.
5
These documents may remain locked pending the outcome of the related motion to seal.
6
7
8
This Order terminates Dkt. No. 149.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 17, 2013
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3.
STIPULATION TO REMOVE EXHIBITS C AND E TO THE WHITE DECLARATION
FROM THE PUBLIC DOCKET, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO.: C11-01446
YGR
4/17/13 (27492) #515472.1
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?