Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Takiguchi v. MRI International, Inc., 2:13-cv-01183-HDM-NJK. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20171101f35 Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 30, 2017
Latest Update: Oct. 30, 2017
Summary: ORDER HOWARD D. McKIBBEN , District Judge . Defendant First Hawaiian Bank ("FHB") has moved for leave to file under seal three Suzuki family trust documents and those portions of FHB's opposition to the plaintiffs' order to show cause and FHB's reply to the plaintiffs' response to its motion for attorney's fees that cite provisions of the trust documents. (ECF Nos. 728, 731 & 738-2). The Suzuki defendants have designated the trust documents as "highly confidential." After reviewing the mate
More

ORDER

Defendant First Hawaiian Bank ("FHB") has moved for leave to file under seal three Suzuki family trust documents and those portions of FHB's opposition to the plaintiffs' order to show cause and FHB's reply to the plaintiffs' response to its motion for attorney's fees that cite provisions of the trust documents. (ECF Nos. 728, 731 & 738-2). The Suzuki defendants have designated the trust documents as "highly confidential." After reviewing the materials FHB and the Suzukis sought to have filed under seal, the court found no reason to seal the documents in their entirety but recognized that they did contain sensitive information, such as birth dates, that should be redacted from any public filing. The court therefore ordered FHB and/or the Suzukis to show cause with specificity on or before October 26, 2017, why other portions of the trust documents and the pleadings citing the trust documents should be sealed. Neither FHB nor the Suzukis have filed a response.

Accordingly, the motions for leave to file under seal are GRANTED IN PART. The birthdates contained in the trust documents shall remain under seal. FHB is accordingly ordered to refile the trust documents (ECF Nos. 729-2 & 732-2 at 6-56), not under seal, with the birth dates redacted. FHB is further ordered to file, not under seal, its unredacted opposition to the application for order to show cause (ECF No. 732-1) and its unredacted reply to the plaintiffs' response to its motion for attorney's fees (ECF No. 738).

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