Campanelli v. Image First Uniform Rental Service, Inc. et al

Filing 102

ORDER RE JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION 101 by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton. (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/20/2018)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KYLE L. CAMPANELLI,

9
10
11

Case No. 15-cv-04456-PJH

Plaintiff,

8
v.

ORDER RE JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION

IMAGE FIRST HEALTHCARE
LAUNDRY SPECIALISTS, INC., et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 101

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13
14

On February 16, 2018, the court denied in part plaintiff’s motion for partial

15

summary judgment. Dkt. 98. The same order terminated the motion with respect to the

16

unresolved issues without prejudice to plaintiff re-noticing the motion once the current

17

stay is lifted. In support of his motion for summary judgment, plaintiff lodged five exhibits

18

under seal. Rather than filing an administrative motion to seal, plaintiff relied on

19

Magistrate Judge Kim’s order sealing the exhibits in conjunction with a discovery dispute.

20

See Dkt. 74.

21

In its order denying summary judgment, the court neither cited nor relied on those

22

exhibits. Dkt. 98 n. 5. The court held that because no motion to seal had been filed, the

23

exhibits must either be made part of the public record or withdrawn. Id. The parties have

24

now filed a joint administrative motion regarding the proper resolution of that order.

25

Defendants argue that the exhibits should be withdrawn because they were not relied

26

upon by the court and because they contain defendants’ confidential information. Plaintiff

27

argues that the exhibits should be made part of the summary judgment record and

28

defendants should file an administrative motion to seal the documents if the defendants

1
2

wish the documents to remain sealed.
The court hereby ORDERS plaintiff to withdraw the five exhibits lodged under seal

3

filed in support of plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment. See Dkt. 92. Either

4

party may seek to file those exhibits under seal—with the appropriate administrative

5

motion—when plaintiff re-notices the unresolved portion of his summary judgment motion

6

after the present stay is lifted.

7

The parties are reminded that the Ninth Circuit applies the “compelling reasons”
standard to sealed documents filed in support of a motion for summary judgment. Ctr. for

9

Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1098 (9th Cir. 2016). That standard is

10

more strenuous than the “good cause” standard applied to documents filed in support of

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

8

non-dispositive motions such as discovery disputes. Id. at 1097.

12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 20, 2018
__________________________________
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2