Laatz

Laatz v. Zazzle, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 20255:22-cv-04844California1,099 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 NICKY LAATZ, et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-04844-BLF

8 Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

9 v. ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO

CONSIDER WHETHER

10 ZAZZLE, INC., et al., DEFENDNATS’ MATERIALS SHOULD

BE SEALED

11 Defendants. [Re: ECF 319] 12 Before the Court is Plaintiff Nicky Laatz’s (“Plaintiff” or “Laatz”) Administrative Motion 13 to Consider Whether Defendants’ Materials Should be Sealed, filed in connection with her Motion 14 for Relief From Nondispositive Pretrial Order of Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 311). ECF 319. 15 Defendants filed a statement in support of sealing the materials identified in Laatz’s motion. ECF 16 323. Plaintiff did not submit any response to Defendants’ statement in support of sealing. 17 For the reasons described below, Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion to Consider Whether 18 Defendants’ Materials Should be Sealed, ECF No. 319, is GRANTED. 19

I. LEGAL STANDARD

20 “Historically, courts have recognized a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.