Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03531/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03531-25/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

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 California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KAPU GEMS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DIAMOND IMPORTS, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-03531-MMC 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ 

MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 

EXHIBITS 6 AND 7 IN SUPPORT OF 

THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT; DIRECTIONS TO 

PLAINTIFFS

Re: Dkt. No. 106

Before the Court is plaintiffs’ administrative motion to file under seal, filed 

November 4, 2016, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5, by which plaintiffs seek permission 

to file under seal the entirety of Exhibits 6 and 7 to the Affidavit of Anthony Paduano, filed 

in support of plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. According to plaintiffs, Exhibits 6 

and 7 have been designated confidential by defendants. Having read and considered the 

administrative motion, the Court rules as follows.

Under the Local Rules of this District, where a party seeks to file under seal any 

material designated as confidential by another party, the submitting party must file a 

motion for a sealing order. See Civil L.R. 79-5(d)-(e). Thereafter, “[w]ithin 4 days of the 

filing of the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a 

declaration . . . establishing that all of the designated information is sealable.” Id. at 

79-5(e)(1). “If the Designating Party does not file a responsive declaration as required by 

subsection 79-5(e)(1) and the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal is denied, the 

Submitting Party may file the document in the public record no earlier than 4 days, and 

no later than 10 days, after the motion is denied.” Id. at 79-5(e)(2). To date, no 

responsive declaration has been filed by defendants. 

Case 3:15-cv-03531-MMC Document 139 Filed 02/13/17 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Accordingly, as defendants have not shown the above-referenced material is 

confidential, plaintiffs’ motion for administrative relief is hereby DENIED, and plaintiffs are 

hereby DIRECTED to file in the public record, no earlier than February 17, 2017, and no 

later than February 23, 2017, the entirety of Exhibits 6 and 7.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 13, 2017

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-03531-MMC Document 139 Filed 02/13/17 Page 2 of 2