U.S. Tobacco Cooperative Inc. et al v. Big South Wholesale of Virginia, LLC d/b/a Big Sky International et al

Filing 391

ORDER granting 379 Motion to Seal regarding 377 Proposed Sealed Document and 378 Proposed Sealed Memorandum in Support. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 12/15/2015. (Grady, B.)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:13-CV-527-F U.S. TOBACCO INC., U.S FLUE-CURED TOBACCO GROWERS, INC., and BIG SOUTH DISTRIBUTION, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. BIG SOUTH WHOLESALE OF VIRGINIA, LLC, d/b/a BIG SKY INTERNATIONAL, BIG SOUTH WHOLESALE,LLC,UNIVERSAL SERVICES FIRST CONSULTING, a/k/a UNIVERSAL SERVICES CONSULTING GROUP, JASON CARPENTER, CHRISTOPHER SMALL, EMORY STEPHEN DANIEL, and other unnamed co-conspirators, Defendants, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Intervenor. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant Albert Johnson's Motion to Seal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, Local Civil Rule 79.2, and Section T of the CMIECF Policy Manual. [DE-379]. For the reasons set forth below, the motionĀ· is ALLOWED. Defendant Johnson seeks to file under seal (a) Albert M. Johnson's Motion for Leave to File Defendant Albert M. Johnson's Amended Answer to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint and Counterclaim [DE-377]; and (b) the Memorandum in Support ofMotion [DE-378]. For the reasons set forth in the Court's earlier orders granting motions to seal, the Court is of the opinion that the motion should be ALLOWED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to maintain the following documents under Seal: (a) Defendant Albert M. Johnson's Amended Answer to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint and Counterclaim [DE-377]; and (b) Memorandum in Support ofMotion to Seal [DE-378]. SO ORDERED. ~' This the _E_ day of December, 2015. J~ESC.FOX Senior United States 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?