McDonald v. CP OpCo, LLC et al

Filing 131

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFFS 88 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL.(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/22/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DAVID MCDONALD,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

v.
CP OPCO, LLC, et al.,

Case No. 17-cv-04915-HSG
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
PLAINTIFF’S ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO SEAL
Re: Dkt. No. 88

Defendants.
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff David McDonald’s administrative motion to file

13

under seal portions of his opposition to Insperity PEO Services, L.P.’s motion for judgment on the

14

pleadings. See Dkt. No. 88. Plaintiff originally asserted that the portions of the opposition he

15

wished to seal “contain information received through third-party discovery and designated as

16

confidential by non-party Bright Event Rentals, LLC.” See id. at 1. However, Bright Event

17

Rentals, LLC later informed Plaintiff that it did “not intend to file a declaration establishing that

18

the designated material is sealable.” See Dkt. No. 91 at 1. Consequently, Plaintiff filed an

19

unredacted version of his opposition, see Dkt. No. 92, and requested that the Court deny as moot

20

his administrative motion to file under seal, see Dkt. No. 91 at 1.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Based on Plaintiff’s representations and his filing of an unredacted version of his
opposition on the public docket, the Court DENIES as moot the administrative motion to file
under seal. This order terminates Dkt. No. 88.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 3/22/2019
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge