Baird v. BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. et al

Filing 342

ORDER RE SEALING OF 340 ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO STAY. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/6/2019)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHARLES BAIRD, et al., Plaintiffs, 8 9 10 11 v. BLACKROCK INSTITUTIONAL TRUST COMPANY, N.A., et al., Case No. 17-cv-01892-HSG ORDER RE SEALING OF ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO STAY United States District Court Northern District of California Defendants. 12 13 14 The Court’s order on Defendants’ motions to dismiss and the administrative motions to file 15 under seal, Dkt. No. 340, shall remain under seal until September 16, 2019 at noon, after which it 16 will be filed on the public docket. If the parties believe any references to sealed materials need to 17 be redacted, the parties are directed to file by September 13, 2019 at noon a joint proposed set of 18 redactions along with a table for each item sought to be sealed and the corresponding citations to 19 where the material has already been ordered sealed. The parties may file their joint proposed set 20 of redactions via an administrative motion to file under seal. 21 The parties should not seek redaction of any information that is now publicly available. 22 For example, although the information in paragraph 439 of Plaintiffs’ second amended class 23 action complaint has been ordered sealed, Defendants subsequently disclosed part of that 24 information in their reply brief. See Dkt. No. 226 at 14:23–24 (“Plaintiffs do no better in 25 defending their charge that BTC’s decision not to sell certain ABS until 2012 was inconsistent 26 with the STIFs’ objective of safeguarding principal.”). Overbroad requests will be denied, and the 27 parties should narrowly tailor any requests for sealing. While the Court cited to paragraphs in 28 Plaintiffs’ second amended class action complaint that have been sealed, that does not necessarily 1 warrant sealing of general descriptions of the subject matter alleged in those paragraphs. 2 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 9/6/2019 ______________________________________ HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 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?