Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04941/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-04941-18/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Pacific Award Metals, Inc.
Counter-claimant
United States Gypsum Company
Counter-defendant

Document Text:

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

 v.

 PACIFIC AWARD METALS, INC.,

Defendant.

 /

No. C 04-04941 JSW

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE STIPULATION TO

PLACE DOCUMENTS UNDER

SEAL

The Court has received the parties joint stipulation to file the following documents under

seal: Defendant Pacific Award Metals’ Motion for Administrative Relief Requesting Leave to

File a Motion for Summary Judgment (filed on April 7, 2006) (Docket No. 164); Opposition of

Plaintiff United States Gypsum Company to Defendant’s Motion for Administrative Relief

Requesting Leave to File a Second Motion for Summary Judgment (filed on April 12, 2006)

(Docket No. 165); and the Declaration of Michael P. Padden in Support of Opposition of

Plaintiff United States Gypsum Company to Defendant’s Motion for Administrative Relief

Requesting Leave to File a Second Motion for Summary Judgment, including attached exhibits

1 through 3 thereto (filed on April 12, 2006) (Docket No. 166).

Although the Court encouraged the parties to reach agreement on this matter, it did not

excuse them from the requirements of Local Rule 79-5 with respect to establishing that the

documents should be filed under seal. Accordingly, the parties’ stipulation is DENIED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the parties filing a joint motion pursuant to that rule. The Court

admonishes the parties that the relief sought by any such motion “must be narrowly tailored to 

Case 3:04-cv-04941-JSW Document 168 Filed 04/17/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

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

seek sealing only of sealable material.”

The Court notes for the benefit of the parties, that based upon the representations of the

parties at the hearing, and before receiving the proposed stipulation, the Court requested that

docket entries 164 and 166 be made inaccessible. Those docket entries shall remain

inaccessible until the Court has received the parties’ revised Local Rule 79-5 submission and

has made a final ruling on whether these documents should be sealed in whole or in part. The

Court will also request that docket entry 165 be made inaccessible until it receives the parties’

revised submission and has made a final ruling on this issue.

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-04941-JSW Document 168 Filed 04/17/06 Page 2 of 2