Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01428/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01428-29/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT CASE NO. CV F 07-1428 LJO JLT

Plaintiff, ORDER ON MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

and (Doc. 266)

ERIKA MORALES, et al.

Plaintiff Intervenors,

vs.

ABM INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED,

et al.,

Defendants.

 /

In this Title VII sexual harassment action, the parties seek to file under seal the motion for

summary adjudication and related documents. In the instant motion, Plaintiff EEOC and Plaintiff

Intervenors Erika Morales and Anonymous Plaintiffs One through Eight move to file several documents

under seal, listed below.

The sealing of these documents is allowable under three protective orders filed by this Court. 

1

Case 1:07-cv-01428-LJO-JLT Document 269 Filed 06/07/10 Page 1 of 4
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

First, a Stipulated Order Re: Documents Disclosed, pursuant to this Court’s March 4, 2010 Discovery

Order dated March 17, 2010, governs corporate information of defendants ABM Industries, Inc., ABM

Janitorial Services, Inc., and ABM Janitorial Services-Northern California, Inc. Second, a Stipulated

Order dated January 14, 2009 governs confidential information regarding documents pertaining to

complaints of sexual assault and/or sexual harassment in defendants’ workplace. Third, a Protective

Order dated July 24, 2008 governs the production, disclosure, and use of confidential information

regarding Anonymous Plaintiffs One through Eight. Plaintiff EEOC and Plaintiff-Intervenors maintain

that the names of the Anonymous Plaintiffs/Claimants at issue must be kept out of all public filings.

In addition, in its April 30, 2010 Order, this Court rules that the parties “are permitted to file

under seal papers to comply with the protective order.

For the foregoing reasons, and pursuant to Local Rule 141, this Court:

1. GRANTS Plaintiff EEOC and Plaintiff-Intervenors Erika Morales and Anonymous

Plaintiffs One through Eight June 4, 2010 motion to file the following documents under

seal:

2. DIRECTS the clerk of court to file under seal the complete, unredacted versions of the

following documents:

a. PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

OPPOSING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY OR, IN THE

ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONRE: FRESNO CLAIMANTS

AND PARENT CORPORATIONS;

b. OPPOSITION TO ABM DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION RE: BAKERSFIELD CLAIMANTS/ INTERVENERS;

c. PLAINTIFF’S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNCONTROVERTED FACTS

IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION RE: FRESNO AND BAKERSFIELD CLAIMANTS

VOLUME 1;

2

Case 1:07-cv-01428-LJO-JLT Document 269 Filed 06/07/10 Page 2 of 4
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

d. PLAINTIFF’S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNCONTROVERTED FACTS

IN SUPPORT OF ITS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION RE: BAKERSFIELD AND FRESNO CLAIMANTS; AND

PARENT CORPORATIONS VOLUME 2;

e. DECLARATION OF EEOC TRIAL ATTORNEY LORENA GARCIABAUTISTA IN SUPPORT OF EEOC’S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND

AUTHORITIES OPPOSING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

RE: FRESNO AND BAKERSFIELD CLAIMANTS AND PARENT

CORPORATIONS; APPENDIX OF EXHIBITS, INCLUDING DOCKET NO.

258; 

f. PLAINTIFF’S APPENDIX OF DEPOSITIONS, EXHIBITS 1-40 IN SUPPORT

OF PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO THE MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

ADJUDICATION AND/ OR JUDGMENT FILED BY DEFENDANTS;

g. PLAINTIFF EEOC’S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT OF

UNDISPUTEDFACTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

RE: BAKERSFIELD CLAIMANTS/ INTERVENORS;

h. PLAINTIFF EEOC’S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT OF

UNDISPUTEDFACTS IN SUPPORT OFTHEIR MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

RE: FRESNO CLAIMANTS AND PARENT CORPORATIONS;

i. DECLARATION OF EEOC TRIAL ATTORNEY LORENA GARCIABAUTISTA IN SUPPORT OF EEOC’S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS’

STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR

MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE,

SUMMARY ADJUDICATION RE: FRESNO CLAIMANTS AND PARENT

3

Case 1:07-cv-01428-LJO-JLT Document 269 Filed 06/07/10 Page 3 of 4
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

CORPORATIONS, INCLUDING DOCKET NO. 263; and

j. PLAINTIFF-INTERVENERS’ RESPONSES & OBJECTIONS TO

DEFENDANTS’ STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF

THEIR MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; and

3. ORDERS Plaintiff, no later than June 16, 2010, to file a redacted copy of the motion

and any supporting papers. The redactions shall be narrowly tailored to protect only that

information that is confidential or was deemed confidential.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 7, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4

Case 1:07-cv-01428-LJO-JLT Document 269 Filed 06/07/10 Page 4 of 4