Bryntensen et al v. Camp Automotive, Inc. et al

Filing 106

ORDER Motion to Seal Docket Nos. 81, 82, 82-1, 82-2, and 82-3 (Dkt. 88 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as explained above. Motion to Seal Second Declaration of Michael G. Schmidt in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint (Dkt. 103 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
CASEY AND SHEREE
BRYNTENSEN, husband and wife, C.B.,
A minor child, and J.B., a minor child,

Case No. 1:13-cv-00491-BLW
ORDER

Plaintiff,
v.
CAMP AUTOMOTIVE, INC., a
Washington Corporation d/b/a CAMP
BMW; LITHIA MOTORS, INC., and
Oregon Corporation; BMW OF NORTH
AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited
company; SCOTT GRUMBLY;
MATTHEW RYDMAN; and STEVE
WILSON, JOHN and JANE DOES 1-10,
whose true names are unknown,
Defendant.

The Court has before it two motions to seal certain documents (Dkts. 88 and 103).
Plaintiffs ask the Court to seal several filings in their entirety because portions of those
filings are, or may be, covered by the protective order in this case. Plaintiffs ask the Court
to seal all the documents out of an abundance of caution.
Documents filed in court must be open to the public – the Court cannot seal
documents simply out of an abundance of caution. Accordingly, the Court will grant the
motions in part, and deny the motions in part. The Court will order the documents subject
to the protective order sealed, but the rest of the filings must remain open to the public.

ORDER - 1

For practical reasons, the Court will leave the already sealed documents sealed, but will
require Plaintiffs to resubmit the filings with only the documents subject to the protective
order sealed.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Motion to Seal Docket Nos. 81, 82, 82-1, 82-2, and 82-3 (Dkt. 88) is
GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as explained above.
2. Motion to Seal Second Declaration of Michael G. Schmidt in Support of
Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend Complaint (Dkt. 103) is GRANTED in part and
DENIED in part as explained above.

DATED: January 5, 2015

_________________________
B. Lynn Winmill
Chief Judge
United States District Court

ORDER - 2