Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-03073/USCOURTS-cand-3_99-cv-03073-67/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1

 The Court’s ruling on said motion is not to be taken as an indication of the Court’s

disposition regarding plaintiff’s motion pursuant to Rule 59(e).

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNIVERSAL TRADING & INVESTMENT

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

 v.

PETRO MIKOLAYEVICH KIRITCHENKO, 

et al.,

Defendants /

No. C-99-3073 MMC (EDL)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR

PROTECTIVE ORDER; VACATING

HEARINGS 

Before the Court is a group of six motions filed on behalf of plaintiff in the abovetitled action. Included therein is plaintiff’s filing of October 12, 2007 titled “Administrative

Motion for Protective Order with Regard to Portions of Documents filed Under Seal,” by

which plaintiff seeks to file under seal, and with limited access provided to defendants,

certain documents in support of plaintiff’s motion pursuant to Rule 59(e) filed October 12,

2007. 

Having reviewed the subject documents, the Court hereby DENIES plaintiff’s motion

for a protective order.1

 Accordingly, if plaintiff wishes to offer said documents in support of

its motion pursuant to Rule 59(e), plaintiff shall file said documents in the public record no

Case 3:99-cv-03073-MMC Document 1750 Filed 11/14/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

later than November 19, 2007. If plaintiff elects to file said documents in the public record,

defendants, no later than November 30, 2007, may file a supplemental opposition to

plaintiff’s Rule 59(e) motion and plaintiff, no later than December 14, 2007, may file a

supplemental reply thereto. Any such supplemental opposition or reply shall be limited to

the subject matter of said documents and shall be limited to seven pages.

In light of the above, the November 16, 2007 and November 30, 2007 hearings on

the above-referenced five additional motions are hereby VACATED and will be reset at a

later date if the Court decides such hearings are necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 14, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:99-cv-03073-MMC Document 1750 Filed 11/14/07 Page 2 of 2