Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-02324/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-02324-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:0078m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

tLED 

l1 HAR 23 AH 8: 31 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

HOUSTON MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES 

PENSION SYSTEM, Individually and On 

Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BOFI HOLDING, INC., GREGORY 

GARRABRANTS, ANDREW J. 

MICHELETTI, PAUL J. GRINBERG, 

NICHOLAS A. MOSICH, AND JAMES 

S. ARGALAS, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 15cv2324 GPC (KSC) 

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF'S 

MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS 

UNDER SEAL 

Doc. No. 91 

21 Before the Court is plaintiff's Motion to File Documents Under Seal certain portions 

22 of the Joint Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute No. 2 ("Joint Motion") [Doc. 

23 No. 90], including certain portions of the Declaration of Daniel P. Chiplock ("Chiplock 

24 Declaration") and the Declaration of John P. Stigi III ("Stigi Declaration") and certain 

25 exhibits thereto. [Doc. No. 91.] Plaintiff brings this Motion pursuant to Local Rule 79 .2( c) 

26 asserting that good cause exists in favor of sealing the documents. For the reasons 

27 explained in more detail below, plaintiff's Motion to File Documents Under Seal is 

28 GRANTED. 

15cv2324 GPC (KSC) 

Case 3:15-cv-02324-GPC-KSC Document 98 Filed 03/23/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
1 Documents filed under seal are not accessible to the public. In the Ninth Circuit, 

2 there is a strong presumption in favor of access to court records. Hages tad v. Tragesser, 49 

3 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995) (recognizing strong presumption in context of civil trial). 

4 A party seeking to seal a judicial record bears the burden of overcoming this strong 

5 presumption by meeting the "compelling reasons" standard. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. 

6 Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). That is, the party must "articulate[] 

7 compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings." Id. (internal citation omitted). 

8 The court must "conscientiously balance[ ] the competing interests" of the public and the 

9 party who seeks to keep certain judicial records secret. Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1135. After 

10 considering these interests, ifthe court decides to seal certain judicial records, it must "base 

11 its decision on a compelling reason and articulate the factual basis for its ruling, without 

12 relying on hypothesis or conjecture." Hagestad, 49 F.3d at 1434 (internal citation omitted). 

13 In general, "compelling reasons" sufficient to outweigh the public's interest in 

14 disclosure and justify sealing court records exist when "court files might have become a 

15 vehicle for improper purposes," such as the use of records to gratify private spite, promote 

16 public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade secrets. Nixon v. Warner 

17 Commc 'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 & n. 7 (1978). 

18 Here, the information plaintiff seeks to file under seal relates to the identity of a non19 party former employee ("Former Employee") of defendant Bofl Holding, Inc. ("Bo fl") 

20 who provided documents in connection with this litigation to an investigator employed by 

21 lead counsel for plaintiff, and which documents are the subject of a discovery dispute 

22 currently pending. [Doc. No. 90.] The Former Employee reportedly fears retaliation and 

23 potential use of her information for improper purposes. [Doc. No. 91, at p. 2; see also 

24 Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union No. 630 Pension-Annuity Trust Fund v. Arbitron, Inc., 

25 278 F.R.D. 335, 344 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) (noting that a confidential witness "may have a 

26 legitimate interest in non-disclosure, where revealing his or her name may lead to 

27 retaliation in a current or future job.").] 

28 

2 

15cv2324 GPC (KSC) 

Case 3:15-cv-02324-GPC-KSC Document 98 Filed 03/23/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
1 Specifically, plaintiff seeks to file under seal and an order permitting plaintiff to file 

2 a redacted version of the following: (1) Defendants' sections of the Joint Motion containing 

3 the Former Employee's identifying information; (2) the Chiplock and Stigi Declarations; 

4 and (3) the following exhibits to the Stigi Declaration: Exhibit B, Exhibit I, Exhibit K, 

5 Exhibit L, and the entirety of Exhibit M (per Bofl's request). 

6 Accordingly, because the Court finds the above-mentioned grounds to be compelling 

7 reasons that outweigh the public's interest in disclosure, the Court GRANTS plaintiff's 

8 motion to file under seal and an order permitting plaintiff to file a redacted version of ( 1) 

9 Defendants' sections of the Joint Motion containing the Former Employee's identifying 

10 information; (2) the sections of the Chiplock and Stigi Declarations containing the Former 

11 Employee's identifying information; (3) redacting the identifying information of the 

12 Former Employee in Exhibits B, I, K, L to the Stigi Declaration and the entirety of Exhibit 

13 M. 

14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

15 Dated: March '142017 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States Magistrate Judge 

3 

15cv2324 GPC (KSC) 

Case 3:15-cv-02324-GPC-KSC Document 98 Filed 03/23/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3