Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00304/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00304-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-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

1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

AMIE HOLAK,

Plaintiff,

v.

KMART CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

1:12-cv-00304 AWI MJS 

ORDER REGARDING REQUESTS TO 

SEAL DOCUMENTS (Docs. 84, 106, 110)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE 

AMENDED MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS 

AND AMENDED REPLY REGARDING 

MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS WITHIN 

SEVEN (7) DAYS

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO FILE 

AMENDED DECLARATION OF JEFFREY D. 

WOHL IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 

CLASS CERTIFICATION 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 

TO STRIKE CLASS CERTIFICATION 

MOTION, REPLY REGARDING CLASS 

CERTIFICATION MOTION, AND 

DECLARATION OF JEFFREY D. WOHL IN 

OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR CLASS 

CERTIFICATION

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Amie Holak's motion for class certification. 

(See ECF No. 82.) Plaintiff filed redacted copies of her motion for class certification and 

in her reply to Defendant's opposition to class certification. (ECF Nos. 82, 109.) With 

regard to Plaintiff's motion for class certification, Plaintiff redacted the following pages of 

the filing: (1) sections of page two of the memorandum of points and authorities, (2) 

Case 1:12-cv-00304-AWI-MJS Document 127 Filed 06/02/14 Page 1 of 3
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

exhibits A and D to the declaration of Raul Perez in support of the class certification 

motion, (3) and portions of exhibit A to the declaration of Amie Holak. (See ECF No. 82.) 

The Court denied the request to seal without prejudice and provided Defendant an 

opportunity to present to the Court why the documents should remain redacted.1(ECF 

No. 87.) In response, Defendant did not object to the public filing of exhibits A and D to 

the Perez declaration. 

Accordingly, the Plaintiff's request to seal is granted in part and denied in part. 

With regard to page two of the memorandum of points and authorities, and exhibits A 

and D to the Perez declaration, the request is denied. However, the redactions to 

portions of exhibit A to Holak's declaration are proper under Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a) as the 

redactions protect Holak's sensitive financial account information. Plaintiff is hereby 

directed to file within seven (7) days of the date of issuance of this order an amended 

class certification motion redacting only the previously redacted sections of exhibit A to 

Holak's declaration. 

With regard to Plaintiff's reply regarding the motion for class certification, Plaintiff 

requested to redact portions of page four (4) of the reply, and exhibits one and two of the 

declaration of Melissa Grant. Despite receiving a copy of the notice of the request to seal 

documents relating to the reply, Defendant did not respond or otherwise assert that the 

documents were protected and should be privileged. Accordingly, the request to seal or 

redact Plaintiff's reply and documents attached thereto is denied. Plaintiff is hereby 

directed to file within seven (7) days of the date of issuance of this order an amended 

reply and accompanying exhibits without any redactions. 

Finally, Defendant filed a motion to redact portions of exhibit J to the declaration 

of Jeffery D. Wohl filed in opposition to the motion for class certification. (See ECF Nos. 

89, 106-07.) Defendant desires to file a redacted copy of exhibit J to protect the putative 

 

1

Plaintiff noted in her request to seal, that the documents were redacted based on Defendant's 

contention that the documents were confidential. Accordingly, the Court requested Defendant, as the party 

asserting the sensitive nature of the documents, to explain why the documents should be sealed. 

Case 1:12-cv-00304-AWI-MJS Document 127 Filed 06/02/14 Page 2 of 3
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

3

class members’ privacy interests in their contact information. See Belaire-West

Landscape, Inc. v. Superior Court, 149 Cal. App. 4th 554, 561 (2007) (holding 

employees have protectable privacy interests in their contact information). Finding good 

cause, the Court hereby grants the request. Defendant is hereby directed to file within 

seven (7) days of the date of issuance of this order an amended declaration of Jeffrey D. 

Wohl containing a redacted copy of exhibit J. 

ORDER

It is hereby ordered that:

1) Plaintiff's request to seal her class certification motion is GRANTED in part 

and DENIED in part. Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to file within seven (7) 

days of the date of issuance of this order an amended class certification 

motion without any redactions except the previously redacted sections of 

exhibit A to Holak's declaration;

2) Plaintiff's request to seal her reply regarding the class certification motion 

is DENIED. Plaintiff is hereby directed to file within seven (7) days of the 

date of issuance of this order an amended reply and accompanying 

exhibits without any redactions; and 

3) Defendant's request to redact portions of exhibit J to the Declaration of 

Jeffery Wohl is GRANTED. Defendant is hereby directed to file within 

seven (7) days of the date of issuance of this order an amended 

declaration of Jeffrey D. Wohl containing a redacted copy of exhibit J. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 2, 2014 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00304-AWI-MJS Document 127 Filed 06/02/14 Page 3 of 3