Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01696/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01696-22/pdf.json

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

---

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 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLS.’ ADMIN. MOT. TO SEAL No. 4:15-cv-01696-YGR (SK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

CHRISTOPHER SLAIGHT, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

TATA CONSULTANCY SERVICES, LTD., 

Defendant. 

Case No. 4:15-cv-01696-YGR (SK) 

CLASS ACTION

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER 

SEAL 

Complaint Filed: April 14, 2015 

Case 4:15-cv-01696-YGR Document 586 Filed 10/11/18 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 

 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLS.’ ADMIN. MOT. TO SEAL No. 4:15-cv-01696-YGR (SK)

1

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 

Having considered Plaintiffs’ Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Court finds that 

good cause does not exist to seal the materials at issue. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal is DENIED. 

Accordingly, the following documents may not be filed under seal: 

Document or Portion of 

Document Sought to be 

Sealed 

Evidence Offered in Support 

of Sealing 

Order 

Plaintiffs’ Motion to 

Permit Contemporaneous 

Testimony From A 

Remote Location Under 

Rule 43(a): 

 4:19-5:8 

 Footnotes 6, 7, 9, 11 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1). 

DENIED.

Exhibit 5: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 6: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 7: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 8: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 9: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Case 4:15-cv-01696-YGR Document 586 Filed 10/11/18 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 

 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLS.’ ADMIN. MOT. TO SEAL No. 4:15-cv-01696-YGR (SK)

2

Exhibit 10: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 11: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 12: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

Exhibit 13: Entire 

document 

None - Designated Confidential 

by Defendant Tata Consultancy 

Services, Ltd., which has not 

filed a supporting declaration as 

required by L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

DENIED.

The Order terminates Docket Number 496. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

DATED: __________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

October 11, 2018

Case 4:15-cv-01696-YGR Document 586 Filed 10/11/18 Page 3 of 3