IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 11, 2012
NUCAL FOODS, INC., PLAINTIFF,
QUALITY EGG LLC; ET AL.,
Defendants Hillandale Farms of Iowa, Inc. and Hillandale Iowa LLC ("defendants") previously filed a defective combined motion for protective order and to modify scheduling order on April 2, 2012. (ECF 75.) The court ordered defendants to renotice their motion for protective order before the assigned magistrate judge and to file their motion to modify the scheduling order separately before the undersigned. (ECF 82.) Defendants subsequently noticed a motion for protective order before the magistrate judge, without filing any moving papers (ECF 87), and filed a motion to modify scheduling order, noticed before the undersigned for May 18, 2012 (ECF 89). The court hereby advances the hearing on defendants' motion to modify scheduling order to April 27, 2012 at 10 a.m.; any opposition shall be filed by April 13, 2012 and any reply shall be filed by April 20, 2012.
In light of the foregoing, defendants' combined motion (ECF 75) is hereby STRICKEN, as are the Mangskau, Toeniskoetter, and redacted Eads Declarations (ECF 76, 78, and 80).
The court notes that defendants have filed a request to seal documents in conjunction with their combined motion for protective order. (ECF 81.) Defendants have attached the exhibits they seek to have sealed to the motion to modify scheduling order; as such, the undersigned considers the request to seal as properly before her.
The court further notes that defendants publicly filed the Eads Declaration although they intended to file it under seal; the Clerk of Court apparently sealed this document as an "emergency measure." (ECF 77.) Local Rule 141(a) provides that "[d]ocuments may be sealed only by written order of the Court." Local Rule 141(b) provides that parties seeking to seal documents may file a notice of request to seal on the public docket, without filing the documents they seek to have sealed. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is hereby directed to strike the sealed Eads Declaration (ECF 77) and reference in a minute order the notice of request to seal (ECF 81).
For the parties' future reference when seeking an order sealing or redacting documents from the undersigned, the parties are reminded that no document will be sealed, nor shall a redacted document be filed, without the prior approval of the court. All requests to seal or redact shall be governed by Local Rules 141 (sealing) and 140 (redaction); protective orders shall not govern the filing of sealed or redacted documents on the public docket. The court will only consider requests to seal or redact filed by the proponent of sealing or redaction. If a party plans to make a filing that includes material an opposing party has identified as confidential and potentially subject to sealing, the filing party shall provide the opposing party with sufficient notice in advance of filing to allow for the seeking of an order of sealing or redaction from the court.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The hearing on defendants' motion to modify scheduling order is ADVANCED to April 27, 2012 at 10 a.m.; any opposition shall be filed by April 13, 2012 and any reply shall be filed by April 20, 2012.
2. Defendants' combined motion (ECF 75) and the Mangskau, Toeniskoetter, and redacted Eads Declarations (ECF 76, 78, and 80) are hereby STRICKEN.
3. The Clerk of the Court shall STRIKE the sealed Eads Declaration (ECF 77) and reference in its stead the notice of request to seal (ECF 81).
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.