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.

City of Oakland, A Municipal Corporation, Acting By and Through Its Board of Port Commissioners v. Ssa Terminals

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 14, 2013

CITY OF OAKLAND, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS, PLAINTIFF-COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT,
v.
SSA TERMINALS, LLC, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-COUNTERCLAIMANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers United States District Court Judge

United States District Court Northern District of California

ORDER EGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL EXHIBITS AND TO THE DECLARATION OF RICHARD T.WHITE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF AND COUNTER-DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE NOS.1-5

For the reasons stated at the pretrial conference on May 10, 2013, the Court will allow and hereby GRANTS the motion to seal Ex. C to the Declaration of Richard T. White in Support of Plaintiff's Motions in Limine Nos. 1--5. The Court reserves its decision on whether Ex. C is sealable beyond the motion in limine stage of the proceedings. The motion to seal as to Ex. E is hereby DENIED.

The parties are again reminded that Civ. L.R. 79-5(a) specifically provides that "[a] stipulation, or a blanket protective order that allows a party to designate documents as sealable, will not suffice to allow the filing of documents under seal." (Emphasis supplied.) The parties may not rely simply on a protective order (in this action or from another action) as grounds for sealing at trial.

Moreover, the parties are reminded that the "good cause" standard does not apply to sealing documents at trial.

Because Plaintiff sought to use Exs. C & E in support of its motions in limine, Plaintiff shall comply with General Order 62 with regard to proper filing procedures for the sealed documents.

Plaintiff shall e-file Ex. C under seal by May 16, 2013. Ex. C of Dkt. No. 142 may remain locked by the Clerk of this Court.

The Clerk of this Court shall UNLOCK Ex. E of Dkt. No. 142. Plaintiff's Motion to Remove Incorrect Filed Documents (Dkt. No. 177) is DENIED AS MOOT.

This Order terminates Dkt. Nos. 177 and 179.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court Northern District of California

20130514

© 1992-2013 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.