Milliner
Milliner v. Bock Evans Financial Counsel, Ltd.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHARLOTTE B. MILLINER et al., Case No. 15-cv-01763-JD
8 Plaintiffs,
ORDER
v. 9 Re: Dkt. Nos. 92, 93 10 BOCK EVANS FINANCIAL COUNSEL,
LTD.,
11 Defendant.
12 13 This order resolves pending administrative motions brought by non-party National 14 Financial Services (“NFS”) to file documents under seal, Dkt. No. 92, and to retain confidentiality 15 of documents produced in discovery, Dkt. No. 93. The requests to seal are granted. 16 I. LEGAL STANDARD 17 In our circuit, in evaluating a motion to seal, different standards apply depending on 18 whether the request is being made in connection with a dispositive motion or a non-dispositive 19 motion. 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 & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006). For 22 non-dispositive motions, the less-stringent “good cause” standard applies. Id. …