Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06443/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06443-14/pdf.json

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

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARTHA RIVERA, MAO HER, ALICIA

ALVAREZ, EVA ARRIOLA, PEUANG

BOUNNHONG, CHHOM CHAN, BEE

LEE, PAULA MARTINEZ, MARIA

MEDINA, MAI MEEMOUA,

MARGARITA MENDOZA, BAO NHIA

MOUA, ISIDRA MURILLO, MARIA

NAVARRO, VATH RATTANATAY,

OFELIA RIVERA, SARA RIVERA,

MARIA RODRIGUEZ, MARIA RUIZ,

MARIA VALDIVIA, SY VANG, YOUA

XIONG, and SEE YANG, 

Plaintiffs,

v.

NIBCO, INC., an Indiana corporation,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CIV F-99 6443 AWI SMS

STIPULATION BETWEEN

PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT

TO FILE CONFIDENTIAL

DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF

EACH PARTY’S REPLY BRIEF RE

THE PENDING CROSS-MOTIONS

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR

IN THE ALTERNATIVE

SUMMARY ADJUDICATION, AND

ORDER THEREON

Replies to oppositions to the pending motions for summary judgment are due November 21,

2005. On November 15, 2005, the parties filed the following stipulation:

Plaintiffs, Martha Rivera, et al., and Defendant NIBCO, et al., hereby stipulate and agree that each

party may file the following documents, based on their respective representations as to the contents,

in support of their respective opposition to the pending Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment, or

in the alternative, Summary Adjudication, under seal pursuant to Local Rule 39-141.

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 377 Filed 11/21/05 Page 1 of 4
Defendant NIBCO will file the documents listed in Attachment “B” hereto. Plaintiffs

will file the documents listed in Attachment “C” hereto.

Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is an Application to file the supporting documents

identified above under seal. The Application sets forth the reasons for the request to file the

documents under seal.

DATED: November 15, 2005. THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY EMPLOYMENT

LAW CENTER

/s/ Willie N. Nguyen

Willie N. Nguyen,

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DATED: November 15, 2005. SAGASER, JONES & HAHESY

By: /s/ Sarah Wolfe

Sarah Wolfe, 

Attorneys for Defendant 

NIBCO, INC.

EXHIBIT “B”

DOCUMENTS DEFENDANT NIBCO WILL FILE UNDER SEAL

1. Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Defendant NIBCO's Motions for

Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication.

2. NIBCO’s Objections to Plaintiffs' Evidence In Support of Defendant NIBCO's Motions for

Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication.

3. Declaration of William C. Hahesy In Support of NIBCO’s Opposition To Plaintiffs’ Motion To

Strike The Declaration of Dr. Barrett.

4. Declaration of Dr. Gerald Barrett In Support of NIBCO’s Opposition To Plaintiffs’ Motion To

Strike The Declaration of Dr. Barrett.

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 377 Filed 11/21/05 Page 2 of 4
EXHIBIT “C”

DOCUMENTS PLAINTIFFS WILL FILE UNDER SEAL

Plaintiffs respectfully request to file the following documents under seal in support of Plaintiffs’

Motion for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication and in opposition to Defendant’s Motion for

Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication:

1. Plaintiffs’ Reply Brief in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment or

Summary Adjudication;

2. Plaintiffs’ Response to Separate Statement of Statement of Undisputed Material Facts

Submitted by Defendant NIBCO, Inc., in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment or Summary

Adjudication; 

3. Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Separate Statement of Material Facts;

4. Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendant NIBCO, Inc.’s Response to Separate Statement of

Material Facts in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication of Issues;

5. Declaration of Ann M. Blankenship In Support of Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of

Plaintiffs’ Motion For Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication of Issues;

6. Declaration of Laurel Kapros In Support of Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’

Motion For Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication of Issues; 

7. Plaintiffs’ Objections to Evidence; and

8. Errata to Plaintiffs' Filings in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and

in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 377 Filed 11/21/05 Page 3 of 4
ORDER

The court having reviewed the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing

therefore: 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the documents identified in Exhibit “B” may be

filed by Defendant NIBCO, Inc. in support of its opposition to Plaintiffs’ pending Motion for

Summary Judgment, or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication, and the documents identified in

Exhibit “C” may be filed by Plaintiffs in opposition to Defendant’s pending Motion for Summary

Judgment, or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication, shall be filed by the Clerk of the Court under

seal and remain so until further order of this court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 16, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:99-cv-06443-JLT-HBK Document 377 Filed 11/21/05 Page 4 of 4