From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Duenez v. City of Manteca

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 13, 2013
No. 2:11-cv-1820 LKK AC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:11-cv-1820 LKK AC

02-13-2013

WHITNEY DUENEZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF MANTECA et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiffs' November 5, 2012 Request to Seal Documents pertaining to Exhibits A and H as attached to the Declaration of Benjamin Nisenbaum In Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents to Defendant City (Set One) and Motion for Sanctions.

After considering this request, and noting that no objections have been filed, the Court finds good cause pursuant to Local Rule 141 to seal the documents attached to the Declaration of Benjamin Nisenbaum In Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents to Defendant City (Set One) and Motion for Sanctions because they were produced to Plaintiffs pursuant to the Stipulated Protective Order issued by the Court and, as such, are confidential under the terms of the Order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' November 5, 2012 Request to Seal Documents is granted.

____________________

ALLISON CLAIRE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Duenez v. City of Manteca

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 13, 2013
No. 2:11-cv-1820 LKK AC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2013)
Case details for

Duenez v. City of Manteca

Case Details

Full title:WHITNEY DUENEZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF MANTECA et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 13, 2013

Citations

No. 2:11-cv-1820 LKK AC (E.D. Cal. Feb. 13, 2013)