Los Gatos Mercantile, Inc et al v. E.I DuPont De Nemours and Company et al
Filing
140
ORDER DENYING 136 PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL CERTAIN PORTIONS OF MATERIALS SUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO DISMISS BROUGHT BY DEFENDANT NATIONAL TITANIUM DIOXIDE COMPANY LTD d/b/a CRISTAL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 1/6/2015. (blflc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2015)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
SAN JOSE DIVISION
6
7
LOS GATOS MERCANTILE, INC., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.
12
Case No. 13-cv-01180-BLF
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL
CERTAIN PORTIONS OF MATERIALS
SUBMITTED IN OPPOSITION TO THE
MOTION TO DISMISS BROUGHT BY
DEFENDANT NATIONAL TITANIUM
DIOXIDE COMPANY LTD d/b/a
CRISTAL
[Re ECF 136]
13
14
15
Plaintiffs have filed an administrative motion to seal certain portions of the materials they
16
have submitted in opposition to the motion to dismiss brought by Defendant National Titanium
17
Dioxide Company Ltd. d/b/a Cristal. Specifically, Plaintiffs move to seal in part their opposition
18
brief and to seal entirely Exhibits 1 through 21 to the Second Declaration of Katherine Van Dyck.
19
Plaintiffs state that they do not believe that those materials should be sealed. However, Plaintiffs
20
bring the present motion because the materials contain information that was designated
21
confidential by Defendants and produced subject to a protective order in the direct purchaser
22
litigation in the District of Maryland.
23
Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(1), Defendants were required to file a declaration within
24
four days of Plaintiffs’ filing of the administrative motion, establishing that the designated
25
materials are sealable. Plaintiffs’ administrative motion expressly articulated Defendants’ burden
26
of establishing that the designated materials are subject to sealing. Defendants did not file the
27
required declaration (or any other response) within the time provided. Accordingly, the
28
administrative motion to seal is DENIED.
1
Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(2), Plaintiffs may file the unredacted Second Amended
2
Complaint no earlier than four days, and no later than ten days, after the filing of this order. Under
3
Civil Local Rule 79-5(f)(2), the materials in question will not be considered by the Court unless
4
Plaintiffs file unredacted versions within seven days after the filing of this order.
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
8
9
Dated: January 6, 2015
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge
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?