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.

Louis J. Amendola, An Individual, Fresno v. Howard Reissner

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


May 16, 2012

LOUIS J. AMENDOLA, AN INDIVIDUAL, FRESNO BEVERAGE COMPANY, D.B.A. VALLEY WIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
HOWARD REISSNER, AN INDIVIDUAL, AMY REISSNER, AN INDIVIDUAL, AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE,
DEFENDANTS.

AND RELATED COUNTER CLAIM

VACATING MAY 21, 2012 HEARING, TAKING MATTER UNDER SUBMISSION, AND ORDER FOR RESPONSE TO SEALING REQUEST

Currently set for hearing and decision on May 21, 2012, is Defendants' motion for summary judgment. Pursuant to Local Rule 230(h), the Court has reviewed the moving papers and has determined that the matter is suitable for decision without oral argument.

Additionally, Defendants have filed a notice of request to seal two documents, Exhibits D and E. Magistrate Judge Oberto previously denied a stipulated request to seal these documents, but did so without prejudice. Defendants indicate that they do not believe that there is confidential information in these exhibits, but have entered into a stipulation to file the documents under seal. Defendants further indicate that they filed the request as per the suggestion of Magistrate Judge Oberto and to give Plaintiffs the opportunity to explain their position to the Court. To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to the request to seal. The Court believes that a response from Plaintiffs on this issue is appropriate.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The previously set hearing date of May 21, 2012, is VACATED, and as of May 21, 2012, the Court will take the matters under submission and will thereafter issue its decision; and

2. As soon as possible, but no later than 10:00 a.m. on May 24, 2012, Plaintiffs shall file a response to the request to seal documents which addresses the concerns raised by the Magistrate Judge in the April 18, 2012 order (Doc. No. 20) and explains why sealing is appropriate.*fn1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

daw 2


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.