Bussing v. Legent Clearing, LLC et al

Filing 47

MEMORANDUN AND ORDER granting #43 Motion to Restrict pursuant to the E- Government Act; granting #45 Motion to Allow Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss & Motion to Restrict Access to All Pleadings. The plaintiff's Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (filing no. 42) is deemed properly filed. The clerk of the court is directed to restrict Filing No. 42 in its entirety. In the event that the parties include the same, or similar, "non-public, sensitive information" in future filings, leave is given to the filing party, pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3, to file the document as restricted. Ordered by Senior Judge Warren K. Urbom. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(ADB, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JULIE A. BUSSING, Plaintiff, v. COR CLEARING, LLC, COR SECURITIES HOLDINGS, Inc., CARLOS P. SALAS, in his Individual Capacity, and CHRISTOPHER L. FRANKEL, in his Individual Capacity, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 8:12CV238 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION TO PROVISIONALLY RESTRICT ACCESS TO PLAINTIFF’S FINAL REVISED BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS AND EXHIBIT This matter is before me on the defendants’ Motion to Provisionally Restrict Access to Plaintiff’s Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss and Exhibit (filing no. 43) and the plaintiff’s Motion to Allow Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss & Motion to Restrict Access to All Pleadings (filing no. 45). Julie A. Bussing’s motion seeks to file a Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. (Filing No. 42.) Further, both motions seek restriction of Bussing’s Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. In accordance with my previous orders, and because the parties agree that restriction is warranted, both motions are granted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. the defendants’ Motion to Provisionally Restrict Access to Plaintiff’s Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss and Exhibit (filing no. 43) and the plaintiff’s Motion to Allow Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss & Motion to Restrict Access to All Pleadings (filing no. 45) are granted. 2. the plaintiff’s Final Revised Brief in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (filing no. 42) is deemed properly filed. 3. The clerk of the court is directed to restrict Filing No. 42 in its entirety. 4. In the event that the parties include the same, or similar, “non-public, sensitive information” in future filings, leave is given to the filing party, pursuant to NECivR 5.0.3, to file the document as restricted. Dated October 30, 2012. BY THE COURT __________________________________________ Warren K. Urbom United States Senior District Judge 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?