Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_97-cv-00152/USCOURTS-caed-2_97-cv-00152-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

1

 The court requested a statement joined by both parties regarding procedures for

compliance with the protective order. Mar. 18, 2005 Order. A “Joint Statement” was filed on

March 30. However, it was signed only by respondent. Respondent states that petitioner will

join in the statement by separate filing. Petitioner has not done so. The undersigned accepts

respondent’s assurance that the March 30 filing represents the view of both parties.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LANCE IAN OSBAND,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-97-0152 WBS KJM

vs. DEATH PENALTY CASE

JILL BROWN, 

 Acting Warden of San Quentin 

 State Prison, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

As noted in the court’s March 18, 2005 order, both parties filed briefs containing

information covered by the August 10, 2000 protective order. The parties request that those

briefs be ordered filed under seal.1 However, because the briefs contain only a small amount of

protected information, a blanket sealing order would be overbroad. Instead, the briefs will be

stricken from the record and replaced with a publicly filed brief and a sealed addendum. The

brief and addendum shall contain the same information and argument as the original briefing.

/////

Case 2:97-cv-00152-KJM-CSK Document 167 Filed 04/26/05 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

2

Accordingly, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Because they may contain information protected by the August 10, 2000

protective order, the following filings shall be stricken from the record: 

a. Petitioner’s October 1, 2003 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in

Support of Motion for Evidentiary Hearing;

b. Respondent’s July 20, 2004 Response to Motion for Evidentiary

Hearing; and

c. Petitioner’s October 19, 2004 Reply to Response to Motion for

Evidentiary Hearing.

2. Within fifteen days of the filed date of this order, each party shall re-file the

memoranda relating to petitioner’s motion for an evidentiary hearing. The replacement briefs,

and any future briefing that contains information covered by the protective order, shall be filed in

two parts. The primary briefs shall be filed in the public file. They shall indicate by footnotes

that additional information is being submitted under seal as directed by this order and the

protective order. Addenda to the briefs, containing all protected information and argument, shall

be filed under seal and served on the opposing party. 

DATED: April 26, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

osbandeviprot.or

Case 2:97-cv-00152-KJM-CSK Document 167 Filed 04/26/05 Page 2 of 2