Upshaw

Upshaw v. Alameda County

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 16, 20193:18-cv-07814California1,061 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 TIKISHA UPSHAW, et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-07814-JD

6 Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING

7 v. ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO

SEAL

8 ALAMEDA COUNTY, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 22, 23 Defendants. 9

10 11 This order resolves the pending administrative motion to file documents under seal in this 12 case, Dkt. No. 23, as well as approves the parties’ stipulated protective order regarding the same 13 documents, Dkt. No. 22, except in those cases where the stipulated protective order conflicts with 14 the Court’s standing orders. 15 I. LEGAL STANDARD 16 In our circuit, in evaluating a motion to seal, two different standards apply depending on 17 whether the request is being made in connection with a dispositive motion or a non-dispositive 18 motion. 19 For dispositive motions, the historic “strong presumption of access to judicial records” 20 fully applies, and a party seeking sealing must establish “compelling reasons” to overcome that 21 presumption. Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu,…

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.