Skyfire v. ServiceSource, Inc.

Filing 50

ORDER. Motion for Ex Parte Interviews 40 is Denied. Motion to Amend 36 is Granted. The Clerk of the Court is directed to accept for filing the Second Amended Complaint [36-1]. Motion to Seal 45 is Granted. Exhibits B and C to Defendant's R esponse to Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [44-2 and 44.3] shall be sealed. On or before 08/17/11, the defendants shall refile the same documents with the private information partially redacted as required by Fed. R. Civ. P by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 08/10/11.(jjh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland
Civil Action No. 10-cv-03155-WYD-BNB
GONJI SKYFIRE,
Plaintiff,
v.
SERVICESOURCE, INC.,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________________
This matter arises on the following:
(1)

Plaintiff’s Motion for Permission to Interview Former Employees of

ServiceSource, Inc. [Doc. # 40, filed 7/25/2011] (the “Motion for Ex Parte Interviews”);
(2)

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [Doc. # 36,

filed 7/20/2011] (the “Motion to Amend”); and
(3)

Defendant’s Motion to Seal Partially Redacted Exhibit [Doc. # 45, filed

8/4/2011] (the “Motion to Seal”).
I held a hearing on the motions this morning and made rulings on the record, which are
incorporated here.
Only the Motion to Seal requires further discussion. I am informed that Exhibit B to the
Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [Doc.
# 44-2] contains the plaintiff’s date of birth, which Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2 requires be partially
redacted to disclose on the year of birth. My review indicates that Exhibit C to the Response

[Doc. # 44-3] also contains the plaintiff’s entire date of birth. Local rule of practice 7.2C(4).
D.C.COLO.LCivR, evidences a preference for procedures less restrictive than sealing, including
redaction, where practicable. To effectuate the protections recognized as necessary by Fed. R.
Civ. P. 5.2, in the least restrictive manner as preferred by D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.2C(4), I will
order Exhibits B and C to the Response [Docs. ## 44-2 and 44.3] sealed, but I will also require
that the defendants refiled the same documents on or before August 17, 2011, with the private
information partially redacted as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a)(2).
IT IS ORDERED:
(1)

The Motion for Ex Parte Interviews [Doc. # 40] is DENIED.

(2)

The Motion to Amend [Doc. # 36] is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is

directed to accept for filing the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. # 36-1].
(3)

The Motion to Seal [Doc. # 45] is GRANTED. Exhibits B and C to Defendant’s

Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint [Docs. ## 44-2
and 44.3] shall be sealed. On or before August 17, 2011, the defendants shall refile the same
documents with the private information partially redacted as required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
5.2(a)(2).
Dated August 10, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Boyd N. Boland
United States Magistrate Judge

2