Avaya Inc. v. Pearce

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California
DecidedOctober 15, 2019
Docket3:19-cv-00565
StatusUnknown

This text of Avaya Inc. v. Pearce (Avaya Inc. v. Pearce) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Avaya Inc. v. Pearce, (N.D. Cal. 2019).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 AVAYA INC., Case No. 19-cv-00565-SI

8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S 9 v. ADMINSTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL

10 RAYMOND BRADLEY PEARCE, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 128 11 Defendants.

12 13 On October 4, 2019, plaintiff filed an administrative motion to file under seal a number of 14 exhibits in support of plaintiff’s supplemental opposition to defendants’ motions to dismiss. Dkt. 15 No. 128. All of the exhibits have been designated as “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” 16 by the DBSI defendants.1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(1), “[w]ithin 4 days of the filing of 17 the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration as 18 required by subsection 79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable.” 19 The DBSI defendants have not filed the required declaration. 20 The Court directs the DBSI defendants to file a declaration no later than October 17, 2019, 21 demonstrating why the exhibits or portions of exhibits should be filed under seal. Where a party 22 seeks to seal documents attached to a non-dispositive motion, a showing of “good cause” under 23 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) is required. Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 24 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 2006); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). To show good cause, the moving 25 party must make a “particularized showing” that “specific harm or prejudice will result if the 26 information is disclosed.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80. “Reference to a stipulation or protective 27 1 order that allows a party to designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish 2 that a document, or portions thereof, are sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). In addition, all requests 3 || to file under seal “must be narrowly tailored,” such that only sealable information is sought to be 4 || redacted from public access. Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. San eat 8 Dated: October 15, 2019 SUSAN ILLSTON 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12

15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hyde & Drath v. Baker
24 F.3d 1162 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Avaya Inc. v. Pearce, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avaya-inc-v-pearce-cand-2019.