Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Christina Mitchell, et al v. Skyline Homes

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 1, 2011

CHRISTINA MITCHELL, ET AL.,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
SKYLINE HOMES, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Defendant's motion to retain the confidentiality of documents produced in discovery (dkt. no. 158) is pending before the court. The parties have submitted a letter brief on the issue as directed by the court's November 15, 2011 order. Upon review of the letter brief, and good cause appearing, THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

In conjunction with plaintiffs' further briefing on a motion for sanctions (dkt. 150, 151), plaintiffs submitted a document (Scarlett Decl., Exh. C, dkt. no. 151-3) produced by defendant during discovery, which was designated by defendant as "confidential" under the protective order previously entered in this action. Plaintiff filed a notice of request to seal (dkt. no. 152) but contested the propriety of maintaining the confidentiality of the document, despite its readily apparent confidential, proprietary nature. Now six weeks after that filing, and after defendant was forced to engage in motion practice and briefing on the issue, the letter brief indicates that plaintiffs' counsel informed defendant's counsel the day the letter brief was due that plaintiffs do not oppose the motion to retain confidentiality.

The protective order (dkt. no. 71) provides detailed procedures for meeting and conferring regarding challenges to confidentiality designations and for appropriate judicial intervention thereafter if the parties cannot resolve the issue. It appears that plaintiffs' counsel would benefit from a careful study of that document. Also commended to plaintiffs' counsel's reading are the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1927.

The court reviewed Exhibit C in conjunction with disposition of the motion for sanctions. The document shall accordingly be made a part of the record, but shall be filed under seal.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The motion to retain confidentiality (dkt. no. 158) is granted.

2. Exhibit C to the Scarlett declaration (dkt. no. 151-3) shall be filed under seal. The request to seal and exhibit, having been previously submitted to the undersigned's proposed orders e-mail box as provided under Local Rule 141(b), shall be filed under seal by the Clerk of Court. Notwithstanding the provisions of Local Rule 141(e)(2)(i), no further submission is required by plaintiff.

4 mitchell11.tea

20111201

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.