ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

On May 11, 2016, the court denied defendant's request to file the administrative record under seal, but granted defendant's request to allow the parties to submit amended trial briefs citing to the redacted documents attached to the complaint. ECF No. 25. On May 13, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation requesting that the court instead allow the parties to file the administrative record with the court with plaintiff's "personal data identifiers redacted (e.g., Social Security Number, date of birth and home address)." ECF No. 26.

As the court found in its previous order, compelling reasons exist to allow the parties to redact plaintiff's personal data identifiers. See Pension Plan for Pension Trust Fund for Operating Eng'rs v. Giacalone Elec. Servs., Inc, No. 13-02338, 2015 WL 3956143, at *10 (N.D. Cal. June 29, 2015) (allowing parties to redact personal identifying information and private information regarding non-parties from documents attached to dispositive motions in ERISA action); see also Kamakana v. City and Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) ("Those who seek to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high threshold of showing that `compelling reasons' support secrecy." (citation omitted)). Accordingly, the court GRANTS the parties' request to file the administrative record with plaintiff's personal data identifiers redacted. The redacted record shall be filed as soon as practicable. No other redactions are permitted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.