From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barker v. Stoli Grp. (U.S.)

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 22, 2021
2:20-cv-02170-KJM-CKD ORDER (E.D. Cal. Sep. 22, 2021)

Opinion

2:20-cv-02170-KJM-CKD ORDER

09-22-2021

Jonathan Barker, Plaintiff, v. Stoli Group (USA), LLC, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

The motion for leave to file redacted documents, ECF No. 21, is denied without prejudice to renewal. Any renewed motion must be supported by information that would permit this court to find “a compelling reason” to withhold information from the public and to “articulate[] the factual basis for [that] ruling, without relying on hypothesis or conjecture.” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Barker v. Stoli Grp. (U.S.)

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 22, 2021
2:20-cv-02170-KJM-CKD ORDER (E.D. Cal. Sep. 22, 2021)
Case details for

Barker v. Stoli Grp. (U.S.)

Case Details

Full title:Jonathan Barker, Plaintiff, v. Stoli Group (USA), LLC, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 22, 2021

Citations

2:20-cv-02170-KJM-CKD ORDER (E.D. Cal. Sep. 22, 2021)