Zody v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 74

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 59 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/23/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 Case No.: C-12-00942-YGR S. ZODY, 7 Plaintiff, 8 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL vs. 9 10 MICROSOFT CORPORATION, 11 Defendant. Northern District of California United States District Court 12 13 Defendant filed a Motion for Administrative Relief to File Documents Under Seal Pursuant to 14 Civil Local Rules 79-5 and 7-11 (“Motion”). (Dkt. No. 59.) Defendant identifies Exhibits L and N to 15 the Declaration of Lynne C. Hermle in Support of Motion for Evidentiary Sanctions as confidential 16 documents. Exhibit L, which has not been designated by Plaintiff as confidential, contains Plaintiff’s 17 medical records. Exhibit N has been designated “Confidential” pursuant to the Protective Order in 18 this action. 19 Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 79-5(d), Plaintiff filed the Declaration of Shawna B. Casebier 20 Establishing that the Information Designated in Defendant Microsoft Corporation’s Motion for 21 Administrative Relief Is Sealable (“Casebier Declaration”). (Dkt. No. 61.)1 Plaintiff identifies a 22 subset of pages within Exhibits L and N as sealable. Specifically, ECF pages 29–37 of Exhibit L 23 (Dkt. No. 57-4) are sealable because they contain Plaintiff’s medical records, which are protected 24 from public disclosure by the right of privacy. In addition, Plaintiff identifies that ECF pages 3–34 & 25 40 of Exhibit N (Dkt. No. 57-5) are sealable because they contain Plaintiff’s private information 26 related to her job search, which is ongoing. 27 28 1 In the Motion, Defendant stated that, under Civ. L.R. 79-5(d), Plaintiff had five days in which to file the declaration justifying sealing. This is a misstatement of the rule, which allows seven days. 1 The Court applies the “good cause” standard to this motion to seal because the Court views the 2 pending Motion for Evidentiary Sanctions to be a non-dispositive motion. Kamakana v. City & 3 County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted); Pintos v. Pacific 4 Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2009). 5 Based upon Plaintiff’s showing, the Court finds the “good cause” standard is met for the 6 documents identified in the Casebier Declaration, namely ECF pages 29–37 of Exhibit L and ECF 7 pages 3–34 & 40 of Exhibit N. The Court hereby GRANTS the Motion as to these documents. The 8 parties are reminded that the lower “good cause” standard will not apply for summary judgment 9 motions or at trial. Sanctions, Defendant shall comply with General Order 62 with regard to proper filing procedures for 12 Northern District of California Because Defendant has sought to attach these documents to its Motion for Evidentiary 11 United States District Court 10 the sealed documents. Defendant must e-file these documents under seal by April 25, 2013. 13 Defendant shall also ensure that, by April 25, 2013, the remainder Dkt. Nos. 57-4 and 57-5 (which are 14 currently locked in ECF) are properly filed and publicly accessible. 15 This Order terminates Dkt. No. 59. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 18 Dated: April 23, 2013 ________________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 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?