Filed: May 30, 2019
Latest Update: May 30, 2019
Summary: ORDER C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court is defendants Oracle International Corporation and Oracle America, Inc.'s ("Oracle") motion to seal (ECF No. 1231), filed on February 28, 2019. Plaintiff Rimini Street, Inc. ("Rimini") filed a response (ECF No. 1236) on May 8, 2019. Oracle did not file a reply. Also before the court is Oracle's motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (ECF No. 1230), filed on April 24, 2019. In reviewing the docket, it has come to
Summary: ORDER C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court is defendants Oracle International Corporation and Oracle America, Inc.'s ("Oracle") motion to seal (ECF No. 1231), filed on February 28, 2019. Plaintiff Rimini Street, Inc. ("Rimini") filed a response (ECF No. 1236) on May 8, 2019. Oracle did not file a reply. Also before the court is Oracle's motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (ECF No. 1230), filed on April 24, 2019. In reviewing the docket, it has come to ..
More
ORDER
C.W. HOFFMAN, JR., Magistrate Judge.
Presently before the court is defendants Oracle International Corporation and Oracle America, Inc.'s ("Oracle") motion to seal (ECF No. 1231), filed on February 28, 2019. Plaintiff Rimini Street, Inc. ("Rimini") filed a response (ECF No. 1236) on May 8, 2019. Oracle did not file a reply.
Also before the court is Oracle's motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (ECF No. 1230), filed on April 24, 2019. In reviewing the docket, it has come to this court's attention that this motion remains pending before the court. This motion should have been granted in the court's prior order (ECF No. 1237) that granted the motion to modify the protective order.
Oracle now moves to seal portions of its motion for leave to supplement the motion to modify the protective order. Oracle argues that it submits its motion for leave under seal because Rimini may choose to designate any of the information contained in Exhibits A-E1 as confidential pursuant to the protective order. (Mot. to Seal (ECF No. 1231).) Rimini responds that it does not wish to seal the documents identified by Oracle and that those documents may be made public. (Resp. (ECF No. 1236).) Given that Oracle only sought to seal the documents on the basis that Rimini may designate the documents as confidential and that Rimini does not find the documents confidential, the court denies the motion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Oracle's motion to seal (ECF No. 1231) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court unseal the unredacted motion (ECF No. 1232).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Oracle's motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (ECF No. 1230) is GRANTED.
FootNotes
1. Exhibits A-E are contained in Oracle's motion for leave, docketed under seal at ECF No. 1232. A redacted version may be found at ECF No. 1230.