Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings In re: Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation — S.D. Cal., No. 21-md-02992 ORDER Granting in Part Motion to File Documents Under Seal re:… — Bofa Ca Unemployment…

Court filing

ORDER Granting in Part Motion to File Documents Under Seal re:… — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 695)

No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 695 · Docket on CourtListener

Summary

An order in In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, filed February 20, 2026 as Document 695; the case caption names Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel. The Court grants in part the plaintiffs' motion to file under seal materials supporting their opposition to the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment (Dkt. No. 630), finding compelling reasons under Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006). It keeps under seal portions of the Index of PX Exhibits and portions of PX 1-5, 8-32, 41, 230, 232 and 298, and seals two further lists of exhibits in full, the second being PX 250-257, 259 and 260. A footnote states that documents already filed under seal after a February 3, 2026 ruling are not part of this sealing order.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

 Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 695   Filed 02/20/26   PageID.59554   Page
                                      1 of 2


 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8                      UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 9                     SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
   IN RE BANK OF AMERICA                   Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB
11 CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT
   BENEFITS LITIGATION                     ORDER GRANTING IN PART
12
                                           MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS
13                                         UNDER SEAL RE: PLAINTIFFS’
                                           OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S
14
                                           MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY
15                                         JUDGMENT
                                           [Dkt. No. 630.]
16
17                                         Judge: Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel
                                           Ctrm: 2D (2nd Floor)
18
19
20 This Document Relates to All Actions
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
 Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB                Document 695        Filed 02/20/26     PageID.59555        Page
                                                 2 of 2


 1                                                    ORDER
 2             Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Motion to File Documents Under Seal, the motion
 3
     is GRANTED in part.1 Plaintiffs have shown compelling reasons to file these documents
 4
     under seal. See Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006).
 5
               The Court will maintain the following materials under seal:
 6
               1. portions of the Index of PX Exhibits attached to the Declaration of Connie K.
 7
                  Chan in support of the MPSJ Opposition (“Chan Declaration”);
 8
               2. portions of PX 1-5, 8-32, 41, 230, 232, and 298 attached to the Chan Declaration;
 9
10             3. PX 33, 35, 39, 42-55, 57-116, 118-125, 127-142, 144-154, 156-160, 162-208,

11                213-223, 227-229, 233-249, 261-278, 280-287, 289, and 290-292, 297 attached
12                to the Chan Declaration in full; and
13
               4. PX 250-257, 259 and 260 attached to the Chan Declaration in full.
14
               IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
16 Dated: February 20, 2026
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
     1
         On February 3, 2026, the Court granted the parties’ join motion to withdraw and refile the public
25 redacted versions of Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment,
26 Plaintiffs’ response to Defendant’s statement of undisputed material facts in support of motion for
   partial summary judgment and Plaintiffs’ additional statement of facts in opposition to motion for partial
27 summary judgment. (Dkt. Nos. 643, 649.) Thereafter, Plaintiffs filed its revised redacted opposition to
   Defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment and related documents, (Dkt. No. 652), and the Court
28 granted Plaintiffs’ revised motion to file these documents under seal. Therefore, the documents
   identified have already been filed under seal and not a part of this sealing order.
                                                                                                           1


File and source

File
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.695.0.pdf
Size
188,315 bytes
SHA-256
c34be182329c4386ea91b7e763b6638b8f92ad1c567e5b8c0527a9a35bd532e6
Our copy
gov.uscourts.casd.709615.695.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top