Stitt et al v. Citibank, N.A. et al

Filing 174

ORDER RE: PRE-FILING LETTERS by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting in part and denying in part 167 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal.(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 GLORIA STITT, et al., 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Plaintiffs, Case No.: 12-cv-03892- YGR ORDER RE: PRE-FILING LETTERS vs. Re: Dkt. Nos. 167, 168, 171, 172 CITIBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AND CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Defendants. Currently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ letter requesting a pre-filing conference to move 13 for the recovery of attorney’s fees under California Civil Code section 1021.5. (Dkt. No. 168.) 14 Defendants filed a letter to the Court in response. (Dkt. No. 171.) The Court does not consider 15 Plaintiffs’ proposed motion to be subject to the undersigned’s pre-filing requirement applicable 16 only to motions for summary judgment. A conference is therefore unnecessary and Plaintiffs may 17 file their proposed motion on thirty-five (35) days’ notice. 18 Also before the Court is Plaintiffs’ administrative motion to file their letter to the Court 19 partially under seal. (Dkt. No. 167.) Defendants, as the parties who designated the information as 20 confidential, timely responded with a more narrowly tailored request. (Dkt. No. 172.) Good 21 cause appearing, Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED with respect to redactions of information 22 previously sealed by the Court as identified by Defendants but is DENIED with respect to the 23 redactions quoting Pifko Declaration Exhibit No. 11. (See id.). 24 This Order terminates Docket Number 167. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 28 Dated: March 23, 2016 _______________________________________ YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

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?