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)
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?