Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-01171/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-01171-32/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 430
Nature of Suit: Banks and Banking
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SEAN L. GILBERT, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

MONEYMUTUAL, LLC, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 13-cv-01171-JSW 

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT'S 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL 

AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO 

PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL 

Re: Docket No. 245 

On January 8, 2016, Defendants filed an administrative motion to seal documents that 

Plaintiffs filed in connection with the pending motion for class certification. Plaintiffs have 

opposed that motion. The Court HEREBY ORDERS the parties to submit additional briefing on 

the proper standard of review to be applied to resolving the motion to seal. See, e.g., Center for 

Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, No. 15-55084, Slip. Op. at 11-12, 17-18 (9th Cir. Jan. 11, 2016). 

The parties’ supplemental briefs shall be due by no later than January 22, 2016. 

Defendants also note that the documents at issue had been designated as confidential 

pursuant to a protective order entered in a companion case pending in state court. There is no 

protective order in this case. However, Northern District Local Rule 79-5(e) expressly sets forth 

procedures about filing documents under seal that have been designated as confidential by an 

opposing party or a non-party. N.D. Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1). Accordingly, Plaintiffs are HEREBY 

ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why they should not be sanctioned in the amount of $250.00 for 

failure to comply with the procedures set forth in that rule. 

// 

// 

// 

Case 4:13-cv-01171-JSW Document 247 Filed 01/13/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

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 

201

Da

Plaintif

16. 

IT IS S

ated: January

ffs’ response

SO ORDER

y 13, 2016 

e to this Orde

RED. 

2

r to Show Cause shall b

JE

Un

e due by no

EFFREY S. W

nited States D

o later than J

WHITE 

District Judg

January 22, 

e 

Case 4:13-cv-01171-JSW Document 247 Filed 01/13/16 Page 2 of 2