Filed: May 22, 2018
Latest Update: May 22, 2018
Summary: ORDER STRIKING MOTIONS TO SEAL AND DIRECTING THE PARTIES TO SUBMIT NEW COMPREHENSIVE BRIEFING RICARDO S. MARTINEZ , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the six Motions to Seal filed by the parties in this matter. Dkts. #149, #158, #175, #184, #190, and #200. These Motions aim to seal summary judgment briefing and over 100 exhibits related to the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment, Dkts. #154 and #162. Currently sealed exhibits total approximately 3,000 pages. Th
Summary: ORDER STRIKING MOTIONS TO SEAL AND DIRECTING THE PARTIES TO SUBMIT NEW COMPREHENSIVE BRIEFING RICARDO S. MARTINEZ , Chief District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the six Motions to Seal filed by the parties in this matter. Dkts. #149, #158, #175, #184, #190, and #200. These Motions aim to seal summary judgment briefing and over 100 exhibits related to the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment, Dkts. #154 and #162. Currently sealed exhibits total approximately 3,000 pages. The..
More
ORDER STRIKING MOTIONS TO SEAL AND DIRECTING THE PARTIES TO SUBMIT NEW COMPREHENSIVE BRIEFING
RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, Chief District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on the six Motions to Seal filed by the parties in this matter. Dkts. #149, #158, #175, #184, #190, and #200. These Motions aim to seal summary judgment briefing and over 100 exhibits related to the parties' Motions for Summary Judgment, Dkts. #154 and #162. Currently sealed exhibits total approximately 3,000 pages.
There is a strong presumption of public access to the court's files. LCR 5(g). A party must explore all alternatives to filing a document under seal. LCR 5(g)(1). A party must minimize the number of documents it files under seal and the length of each document it files under seal. LCR 5(g)(4). Only in rare circumstances should a party file a motion, opposition, or reply under seal. LCR 5(g)(5).
A motion to seal must include a "specific statement of the applicable legal standard and the reasons for keeping a document under seal, including an explanation of i) the legitimate private or public interests that warrant the relief sought; ii) the injury that will result if the relief sought is not granted; and iii) why a less restrictive alternative to the relief sought is not sufficient." LCR 5(g)(3)(B).
The Court has begun review of the parties' Motions to Seal and finds that the current form of briefing has resulted in duplicative arguments. Furthermore, the parties have agreed that certain documents no longer need to be sealed. See Dkt. #168 at 5. In order to efficiently address the concerns of the parties in a timely manner, and in order to avoid conflicting rulings on the sealing of various documents, the Court will direct the parties to submit new comprehensive briefing. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that:
1) The parties' Motions to Seal, Dkts. #149, #158, #175, #184, #190, and #200, are STRICKEN. All currently sealed documents are to remain sealed pending further direction from the Court.
2) Defendants are to submit one brief, not to exceed 15 pages, listing all of the remaining documents they wish to seal and the legal arguments for doing so. Defendants may divide the documents into categories with applicable argument, but must otherwise follow LCR 5(g)(3)(B). Defendants' brief is due no later than Tuesday, June 5, 2018.
3) Plaintiff is to submit one brief, not to exceed 15 pages, responding to Defendants' arguments. Plaintiff's brief is due 14 days after Defendant's brief is filed.
4) The parties may not attach any new declarations or exhibits.
5) The parties must cite to the sealed documents in question by docket number.
6) No reply brief is permitted.
