Court filing

Proposed Order — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 171.1)

Summary

A [Proposed] Order Re Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion to Consider Whether Another Party's Materials Should Be Sealed (Dkt. 167), Document 171-1, filed 03/10/23 in Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC, Cat Brooks and Rasheed Shabazz v. Thomson Reuters Corporation, N.D. Cal., San Francisco Division, three pages. The form of order is submitted by Perkins Coie LLP for Defendant Thomson Reuters Corporation, with the signature block of Hon. Edward M. Chen. It recites that the Court, having considered the motion and Defendant's Statement in Response, including the declaration of Kevin Appold (Dkt. 150-3), would find that good cause and compelling reasons exist to seal listed portions of Plaintiffs' Opposition (Dkt. 167-3) and of Exhibit 2 to the Mura declaration (Dkt. 167-5). A table gives each portion by page and line, and the date line is left blank.

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

Cite this document

“Proposed Order — Brooks v. Thomson Reuters Corporation (Dkt. 171.1).” Original at ecf.cand.uscourts.gov, No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC, Doc. 171-1. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-brooks-thomsonreuters-cand-374304/2023-03-10-gov-uscourts-cand-374304-171-1-gov-uscourts-cand-374304-171-1/, SHA-256 5663f4237f6cdab5151e8554f28f2ef40e2cad4aebd61f10891e60d76bb66aa2.

Search CourtListener for this docket number

Full text

     Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC         Document 171-1     Filed 03/10/23    Page 1 of 3



 1    Susan D. Fahringer, Bar No. 21567              Gabriella Gallego, Bar No. 324226
      SFahringer@perkinscoie.com                     GGallego@perkinscoie.com
 2    Nicola C. Menaldo, pro hac vice                PERKINS COIE LLP
 3    NMenaldo@perkinscoie.com                       3150 Porter Drive
      Erin K. Earl, pro hac vice                     Palo Alto, CA 94304-1212
 4    EEarl@perkinscoie.com                          Telephone: 650.838.4300
      Anna M. Thompson, pro hac vice                 Facsimile: 650.838.4350
 5    AnnaThompson@perkinscoie.com
      PERKINS COIE LLP                               Hayden M. Schottlaender, pro hac vice
 6    1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900                  HSchottlaender@perkinscoie.com
 7    Seattle, WA 98101-3099                         PERKINS COIE LLP
      Telephone: 206.359.8000                        500 N. Akard Street, Suite 3300
 8    Facsimile: 206.359.9000                        Dallas, TX 75201-3347
                                                     Telephone: 214.965.7700
 9    Attorneys for Defendant                        Facsimile: 214.965.7799
      Thomson Reuters Corporation
10

11                              UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                              NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12                                 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
13

14   CAT BROOKS and RASHEED                      Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC
     SHABAZZ, individually and on behalf of
15   all others similarly situated,              [PROPOSED] ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’
                                                 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
16                         Plaintiffs,           CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER
                                                 PARTY’S MATERIALS SHOULD BE
17          v.                                   SEALED (DKT. 167)

18   THOMSON REUTERS CORPORATION,

19                         Defendant.

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
     Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC                                                [PROPOSED] ORDER
     Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC         Document 171-1        Filed 03/10/23      Page 2 of 3



 1                                       [PROPOSED] ORDER

 2          The Court, having considered Plaintiffs’ Administrative Moton to Consider Whether

 3   Another Party’s Materials Should be Sealed (Dkt. 167) and all supporting materials thereto, and

 4   having considered Defendant Thomson Reuters’ Statement in Response and all supporting

 5   materials thereto, including the declaration of Kevin Appold (Dkt. 150-3), finds that good cause

 6   and compelling reasons exist to seal:

 7          The following portions of Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Expert

 8   Testimony of Finance Scholars Group, Inc. (Terry Lloyd) (Dkt. 167-3) and the following portions

 9   of Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Andre Mura in support thereof (Dkt. 167-5):

10
                Cite                                     Portion(s) to Seal
11
        Dkt. 167-3            Page 2, line 14 (between “there was a” and “between”)
12      Pls. Opp. (2:14)
13      Dkt. 167-3            Page 2, line 17 (between “that if” and “of CLEAR’s”)
        Pls. Opp. (2:17)
14
        Dkt. 167-3            Page 2, line 18 (between “and” and “were”)
15      Pls. Opp. (2:18)
16      Dkt. 167-3            Page 2, line 22 (between “were” and “then”)
        Pls. Opp. (2:22)
17
        Dkt. 167-3            Page 8, line 10 (between “about” and “of CLEAR’s”)
18      Pls. Opp. (8:10)
19      Dkt. 167-3            Page 8, line 11 (between “and” and “are”)
        Pls. Opp. (8:11)
20
        Dkt. 167-3            Page 8, line 13 (between “them” and “to account”)
21      Pls. Opp. (8:13)
22      Dkt. 167-3            Page 8, line 22 (between “to be” and “TR”)
        Pls. Opp. (8:22)
23
        Dkt. 167-3            Page 8, line 22.5 (between “field” and “percent”)
24      Pls. Opp. (8:22.5)
25      Dkt. 167-5            Page 2, lines 9-11 (after “information requested by Plaintiffs by
        Mura Decl. Ex. 2      determining the total number of” and before “and used to help
26                            facilitate person searches run through”)
27      Dkt. 167-5            Page 2, line 13 (after “determine the subset of those” and before “a
        Mura Decl. Ex. 2      current or past California address.”)
28
     Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC                    -2-                                [PROPOSED] ORDER
     Case 3:21-cv-01418-EMC        Document 171-1         Filed 03/10/23      Page 3 of 3



 1
                Cite                                     Portion(s) to Seal
 2
        Dkt. 167-5            Page 2, line 16 (after “Note that a single natural person may be
 3      Mura Decl. Ex. 2      associated with several different” and before “such that”)
 4      Dkt. 167-5            Page 2, line 18 (after “The fact that” and before “a current or past
        Mura Decl. Ex. 2      California address does not”)
 5
        Dkt. 167-5            Page 2, line 26 through page 3, line 1 (after “2.” entire sentence)
 6      Mura Decl. Ex. 2
 7      Dkt. 167-5            Page 3, line 2 (after “The totals include” and before “which relate to
        Mura Decl. Ex. 2      persons who are deceased and/or who”)
 8
        Dkt. 167-5            Page 3, lines 4-5 (after “As of January 9, 2023,” and before “of these
 9      Mura Decl. Ex. 2      contained a current or past California address.”)
10      Dkt. 167-5            Page 5, lines 4.5-8.5 (all eight rows of data/information underneath
11      Mura Decl. Ex. 2      the table column headers)

12

13

14   IT IS SO ORDERED.
15

16    DATED: ____________________                        __________________________________
                                                         Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen
17                                                       United States District Judge
18

19   Submitted by:
20   PERKINS COIE LLP
21

22   By: /s/ Anna Mouw Thompson
     Anna Mouw Thompson
23
     Attorneys for Defendant
24   Thomson Reuters Corporation
25

26

27

28
     Case No. 3:21-cv-01418-EMC                    -3-                               [PROPOSED] ORDER

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.cand.374304.171.1.pdf
Size: 130,428 bytes
SHA-256: 5663f4237f6cdab5151e8554f28f2ef40e2cad4aebd61f10891e60d76bb66aa2
Our copy: gov.uscourts.cand.374304.171.1.pdf
Original: PACER (login required)