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)

Download PDF
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?