Ashker v. Newsom

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EUREKA DIVISION 11 TODD ASHKER, et al., Case No.: 4:09-cv-05796-CW (RMI) 12 Plaintiffs, CLASS ACTION 13 v. [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE 14 GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF UNDER SEAL CALIFORNIA, et al., 15 Judge: Honorable Robert M. Illman Defendants. 16

17 18 The Court has received the Joint Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, and the 19 Declaration of Carmen Bremer in support of the same. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(a), The 20 Parties have shown that the documents to be sealed are entitled to protection under the law because 21 they contain confidential information that Defendants claim could harm CDCR institutional safety 22 and security if disclosed. See Dugan v. Lloyds TSB Bank, PLC, No. 12-cv-02549-WHA (NJV), 23 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51162, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2013) (finding that good cause may exist to 24 seal records “if disclosure of the information might harm a litigant’s competitive standing”). The 25 Parties have met the “good cause” standard for sealing the Parties’ June 25, 2021 Joint Letter Brief 26 Regarding Retaliation and Exhibits A through D to the letter because the Parties have shown that 27 they contain confidential information that Defendants claim would harm institutional safety and 28 1 | security, and would further compromise ongoing investigations of alleged prison gang activity if 2 || disclosed. See Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006). 3 Having considered the Joint Administrative Motion to File Under Seal and the Declaration 4 | of Carmen Bremer in support of same, and good cause appearing therefor, the Joint Motion is 5 | hereby GRANTED. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 | Dated: June 28, 2021 norable Robert M. Illman 9 United States Magistrate Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 fPROPCSED]ORDERGRANTINGJOINT 2 ~~ Case 4:09-cv-05796-CW (RN