Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Services, Inc., 2:12-cv-536. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20150113a57 Visitors: 14
Filed: Jan. 12, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 12, 2015
Summary: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL EXHIBITS UNDER SEAL CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") hereby moves this Court for an Order granting the leave to file under seal three exhibits to its motion to compel (ECF Nos. 692-1, 692-2, 692-3). In support of this motion, the FTC states as follows: 1. On August 15, 2012, this Court entered an order (ECF No. 145), sealing financial documents (including images of checks) previously filed by the
More

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL EXHIBITS UNDER SEAL

CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") hereby moves this Court for an Order granting the leave to file under seal three exhibits to its motion to compel (ECF Nos. 692-1, 692-2, 692-3). In support of this motion, the FTC states as follows:

1. On August 15, 2012, this Court entered an order (ECF No. 145), sealing financial documents (including images of checks) previously filed by the FTC as exhibits to its motion for preliminary injunction.

2. On January 11, 2013, this Court entered an amended protective order (ECF No. 308) permitting parties to designate documents as confidential, and to submit such information to the Court under seal.

3. On October 24, 2014, the FTC filed a motion to compel against, inter alia, Relief Defendant Kim Tucker. (ECF No. 691.) The FTC's motion cites to various checks (arranged in three exhibits) tending to show that the defendants have used corporate funds for personal purposes. (ECF Nos. 692-1, 692-2, 692-3.) The checks are redacted to obscure bank account information.

4. The FTC does not take the position that the checks, as redacted, constitute "confidential" documents within the meaning of the amended protective order, and the FTC does not contend that the checks should be filed under seal. However, out of an abundance of caution, and as a result of the Court's August 15, 2012 order, the FTC moves to file these exhibits under seal to preserve any other party's ability to make the required showing for under seal treatment.

WHEREFORE, the FTC respectfully requests leave of the Court to file three motion to compel exhibits (ECF Nos. 692-1, 692-2, 692-3) under seal, with a reservation of the right to move the Court at a later date to lift the seal order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer