Ready Transportation, Inc. v. AAR Manufacturing, Inc.

Good Law
627 F.3d 402·2010 WL 4925426·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24431
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 30, 201008-16941California1,297 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pollak, J.

Defendants-Appellants (collectively “AAR”) appeal from the District Court’s order denying a motion to strike from its docket a confidential settlement agreement filed by Plaintiffs-Appellees (collectively “Ready”). We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

I

Ready sued AAR and others, including the federal government, in a dispute, the precise nature of which is not pertinent to our inquiry here, over shipping agreements between the government and various defense contractors. All defendants except AAR were dismissed from the case in its early stages. Ready and AAR then settled their dispute under the terms of a confidential settlement agreement. They stipulated to dismissal of all claims except for a disagreement over attorney’s fees. The District Court dismissed the balance of the case with prejudice, and it “retain[ed] jurisdiction solely for the purpose of hearing and ruling upon Plaintiffs’ application re legal entitlement to attorney’s fees.”

In support of its motion for fees, Ready attempted to file the confidential settlement agreement under seal, but the District Court denied the request and returned the document to Ready. Two days later, Ready filed the…

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.