Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Court filings Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another Party's Material… — Brooks v. Thomson…

Court filing

Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another Party's Material… — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 167)

No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC · Doc. 167 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

             Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC                    Document 167   Filed 03/06/23   Page 1 of 4



 1    Eric H. Gibbs (SBN 178658)                                 Geoffrey A. Graber (SBN 211547)
      Andre M. Mura (SBN 298541)                                 Karina G. Puttieva (SBN 317702)
 2    Amy M. Zeman (SBN 273100)                                  COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL
 3    Mark H. Troutman (pro hac vice)                            PLLC
      Ezekiel S. Wald (SBN 341490)                               1100 New York Ave. NW, Fifth Floor
 4    Hanne Jensen (SBN 336045)                                  Washington, DC 20005
      GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP                                        Telephone: (202) 408-4600
 5    1111 Broadway, Suite 2100                                  Facsimile: (202) 408-4699
 6    Oakland, CA 94607                                          ggraber@cohenmilstein.com
      Telephone: (510) 350-9700                                  kputtieva@cohenmilstein.com
 7    Facsimile: (510) 350-9701
      ehg@classlawgroup.com
 8    amm@classlawgroup.com
      amz@classlawgroup.com
 9
      mht@classlawgroup.com
10    zsw@classlawgroup.com
      hj@classlawgroup.com
11
12   Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class
13
14
15                              UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                                  NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16                                     SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
17   CAT BROOKS and RASHEED SHABAZZ,                            Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW
18   individually and on behalf of all others similarly
     situated,                                                  PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
19                                                              TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER
                                           Plaintiffs,          PARTY’S MATERIALS SHOULD BE
20           v.                                                 SEALED
21
     THOMSON REUTERS CORPORATION,                               Hon. Edward M. Chen
22
                                         Defendant.
23
24
25
26
27
28


     PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTY’S
                           MATERIALS SHOULD BE SEALED
                             Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW
           Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC            Document 167         Filed 03/06/23      Page 2 of 4



 1          Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(f) and the Stipulated Protective Order entered by the Court on
 2   December 17, 2021 (ECF No. 70), Plaintiffs request that the Court consider whether material
 3   designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”
 4   should be filed under seal. Specifically, Defendant has designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY
 5   CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” the following exhibits to Andre M. Mura’s
 6   Declaration in Support of Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony
 7   of Finance Scholars Group, Inc. (Terry Lloyd):
 8           Exhibit                   Document                 Provisionally        Evidence Offered in
                                                              Sealed Portion(s)       Support of Sealing
 9            Ex. 1           Kidder Deposition               43:13-43:23         Def. to provide evidence
10                                                                                per Local Rule 79-5(f)

11
              Ex. 2           Defendant’s Fourth              Entire document     Def. to provide evidence
12                            Supplemental Answers &                              per Local Rule 79-5(f)
13                            Objections to Plaintiffs’
                              First Interrogatories
14
15          The following portions of Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Expert
16   Testimony of Finance Scholars Group, Inc. (Terry Lloyd) (“Lloyd Opposition”) quote from or
17   otherwise refer to the above exhibits and so may also be potentially considered confidential by
18   Defendant:
19    Provisionally Sealed Portion of Lloyd Opposition    Evidence Offered in Support of Sealing
20    Page 8, line 22 (between “to be” and “TR”)          Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      Page 8, line 22.5 (between “with a” and “search”)   Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
21
      Page 8, line 22.5 (between “field” and “percent”)   Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
22    Page 8, line 23.5 (between “summing” and            Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      “column”)
23    Page 8, lines 23.5-24 (between “sum of” and         Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      “column”)
24
25
            The following portions of Plaintiffs’ Lloyd Opposition quote from or otherwise refer to expert
26
     reports that were submitted under seal or designated under the parties’ protective order by Defendant
27
     and so may also be potentially considered confidential by Defendant:
28
                                              1
     PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTY’S
                           MATERIALS SHOULD BE SEALED
                             Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW
            Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC             Document 167         Filed 03/06/23       Page 3 of 4



 1    Provisionally Sealed Portion of Lloyd Opposition       Evidence Offered in Support of Sealing
 2    Page 2, line 14 (between “there was a” and             Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      “between”)
 3    Page 2, line 17 (between “that if” and “of             Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
 4    CLEAR’s”
      Page 2, line 18 (between “and” and “were”)             Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
 5    Page 2, line 22 (between “were” and “then”)            Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      Page 6, lines 16-17 (entire parenthetical following    Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
 6
      “¶¶ 113-14”)
 7    Page 6, line 22 (between “To be” and “Kidder”)         Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      Page 6, line 23 (between “allocated” and end of        Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
 8    sentence)
      Page 8, line 10 (between “about” and “of               Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
 9
      CLEAR’s”)
10    Page 8, line 11 (between “and” and “are”)              Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
      Page 8, line 13 (between “them” and “to                Def. to provide evidence per L.R. 79-5(f)
11    account”)
12
13           Pursuant to Local Rule 79-5(f)(3), Defendant, as the Designating Party, bears the responsibility

14   to establish that its designated materials are sealable. Plaintiffs provisionally file these documents under

15   seal to give Defendant an opportunity to specify any reasons for keeping the documents under seal

16   pursuant to Local Rule 79-5(c).

17
     DATED: March 6, 2023                                     Respectfully submitted,
18
                                                              /s/ Andre M. Mura
19                                                            Andre M. Mura

20                                                            Eric H. Gibbs (SBN 178658)
                                                              Andre M. Mura (SBN 298541)
21
                                                              Amy M. Zeman (SBN 273100)
22                                                            Mark H. Troutman (pro hac vice)
                                                              Ezekiel S. Wald (SBN 341490)
23                                                            Hanne Jensen (SBN 336045)
                                                              GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP
24
                                                              1111 Broadway, Suite 2100
25                                                            Oakland, California 94607
                                                              Telephone: (510) 350-9700
26                                                            Facsimile: (510) 350-9701
                                                              ehg@classlawgroup.com
27                                                            amm@classlawgroup.com
28                                                            amz@classlawgroup.com
                                                              mht@classlawgroup.com
                                              2
     PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTY’S
                           MATERIALS SHOULD BE SEALED
                             Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW
         Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC   Document 167    Filed 03/06/23         Page 4 of 4



 1                                         zsw@classlawgroup.com
                                           hj@classlawgroup.com
 2
 3                                         Geoffrey A. Graber (SBN 211547)
                                           Karina G. Puttieva (SBN 317702)
 4                                         COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL
                                           PLLC
 5                                         1100 New York Ave. NW, Fifth Floor
 6                                         Washington, DC 20005
                                           Telephone: (202) 408-4600
 7                                         Facsimile: (202) 408-4699
                                           ggraber@cohenmilstein.com
 8                                         vnugent@cohenmilstein.com
                                           kputtieva@cohenmilstein.com
 9
10                                         Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
                                              3
     PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTY’S
                           MATERIALS SHOULD BE SEALED
                             Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC-KAW


File and source

File
gov.uscourts.cand.374304.167.0.pdf
Size
186,280 bytes
SHA-256
e107a0d508f775645b869d73659415ef4dc4ca9bacaa2ce9b30a858402c929fb
Our copy
gov.uscourts.cand.374304.167.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top