Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00280/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00280-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1446 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

 Case No. 2:16-cv-00280-JAM-EFB

STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO REMOVE UNREDACTED DOCUMENT (DKT. NO. 1-9) 

AND TO RE-FILE IT WITH REDACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Spencer C. Skeen CA Bar No. 182216

spencer.skeen@ogletreedeakins.com 

Tim L. Johnson CA Bar No. 265794 

tim.johnson@ogletreedeakins.com 

OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, 

SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 

4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 990 

San Diego, CA 92122 

Telephone: 858.652.3100 

Facsimile: 858.652.3101 

Attorneys for Defendant 

BLUMENTHAL, NORDREHAUG & BHOWMIK 

Norman B. Blumenthal CA Bar No. 068687 

Kyle R. Nordrehaug CA Bar No. 205975 

Aparajit Bhowmik CA Bar No. 248066 

Piya Mukherjee CA Bar No. 274217 

2255 Calle Clara 

La Jolla, CA 92037 

Telephone: (858)551-1223 

Facsimile: (858) 551-1232 

Website: www.bamlawca.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

RICKEY HENRY, an individual, on 

behalf of himself, and on behalf of all 

persons similarly situated, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CENTRAL FREIGHT LINES, INC., a 

Corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, 

Inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 2:16-cv-00280-JAM-EFB

STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO 

REMOVE UNREDACTED 

DOCUMENT (DKT. NO. 1-9) AND TO 

RE-FILE IT WITH REDACTION; 

ORDER 

Action Filed: October 20, 2015 

Removed: February 23, 2016 

Case 2:16-cv-00280-DAD-JDP Document 11 Filed 02/26/16 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

 1 Case No. 2:16-cv-00280-JAM-EFB

STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO REMOVE UNREDACTED DOCUMENT (DKT. NO. 1-9) 

AND TO RE-FILE IT WITH REDACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

RECITALS 

1. On October 20, 2015, Plaintiff Rickey Henry (“Plaintiff”) filed this 

action in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Sacramento. 

2. On February 11, 2016, Defendant Central Freight Lines, Inc. 

(“Defendant”) removed this matter to this Court under the Class Action Fairness Act, 

28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2). (Dkt. No. 1.) 

3. On February 23, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand to State Court 

for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and a Motion to Redact Plaintiff’s Personal 

Information from the Record. (Dkt. No. 7.) 

4. After reviewing Plaintiff’s Motion to Redact Plaintiff’s Personal 

Information from the Record, Defendant’s counsel’s realized they had submitted an 

unredacted copy of Plaintiff’s Independent Contractor Agreement by mistake. (Dkt. 

No. 1-9.) 

5. On February 24, 2016, Defendant’s counsel asked Plaintiff’s counsel to 

enter into this Stipulation and Request to Remove Unredacted Document (Dkt. No. 

1-9) and to Re-File It With Redaction. 

/ / / 

 

Case 2:16-cv-00280-DAD-JDP Document 11 Filed 02/26/16 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

 2 Case No. 2:16-cv-00280-JAM-EFB

STIPULATION AND REQUEST TO REMOVE UNREDACTED DOCUMENT (DKT. NO. 1-9) 

AND TO RE-FILE IT WITH REDACTION; [PROPOSED] ORDER

STIPULATION 

 NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant stipulate and request that this 

Court strike an unredacted document containing Plaintiff’s personal information that 

should have been redacted pursuant to Rule 5.2 (Dkt. No. 1-9) and allow Defendant 

to re-file a redacted version of the document. 

DATED: February 24, 2016 BLUMENTHAL, NORDREHAUG & BHOWMIK 

By: /s/ Aparajit Bhowmik Aparajit Bhowmik 

Piya Mukherjee 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

DATED: February 24, 2016 OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & 

STEWART, P.C. 

By: /s/ Tim L. Johnson Spencer C. Skeen 

Tim L. Johnson 

Attorneys for Defendant

ORDER 

 Good cause appearing, the Court hereby approves the Stipulation and Request 

to Remove Unredacted Document (Dkt. No. 1-9) and to Re-File It With Redaction 

and orders: 

1. The Clerk’s Office is directed to remove the unredacted document (Dkt. 

No. 1-9); and 

2. Defendant is directed to refile a redacted version of the document. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 2/25/2016 /s/ John A. Mendez_______________________ 

 JOHN A MENDEZ 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

23968155.1 

Case 2:16-cv-00280-DAD-JDP Document 11 Filed 02/26/16 Page 3 of 3