Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Rosenfeld Meyer
-
Utility | Filed: January 03, 2024 | Entered: January 03, 2024 Doublevision Entertainment, LLC v. Navigators Specialty Insurance Company et al
Insurance | California Northern
Remark
Remark: Trial Exhibits disposed of in accordance with Local Rule 79-4(c). (msr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/3/2024)
-
Order | Filed: July 26, 2023 Catala v. Joombas Co LTD et al
Contract: Other | New York Southern
Order
ORDER: As stated in this Court's Individual Rules (see Individual Rules of Practice of Judge Paul. G. Gardephe in Civil Cases, 11.B.), any application for sealing of a court filing must be narrowly tailored to serve whatever purpose justifies t he sealing, and must address the presumption in favor of public access to judicial documents. See, Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006) ("[The] court must first conclude that thedocuments at issue are indeed & #039;judicial documents"'; "[o]nce the court has determined that the documents are judicial documents and that therefore a common law presumption of access attaches, it must determine the weight of that presumption"; "[f]inal ly, after determining the weight of the presumption of access, the court must 'balance competing considerations against it."'). The parties' consent to the sealing of a judicial document, or the existence of a protective order, do es not constitute proof that the sealing of a judicial document is appropriate. See, In re Gen. Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litig., No. 14- MD-2543 (JMF), 2015 WL 4750774, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2015). The documents currently under seal will be uns ealed by August 2, 2023, absent amotion to seal. Any motion to seal must address the Lugosch factors and propose sealing that is narrowly tailored to serve the purpose that allegedly justifies sealing. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul G. Gardephe on 7/26/2023) (ama)
-
Order | Filed: October 10, 2022 | Entered: October 10, 2022 Fastcabinet Doors, Inc. v. Cabinet Doors Fast, LLC et al
Trademark | California Eastern
Minute Order ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings
MINUTE ORDER TEXT ONLY): The Court is in receipt of plaintiff's 13 Status Report filed 10/10/2022 and hereby ORDERS the Scheduling Conference continued from 10/24/2022 to 1/30/2023 at 01:30 PM before Senior Judge William B. Shubb. Plaintiff shall file a motion for default judgment pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(19) no later than 1/17/2023, or a further status report if the motion has not been filed by this date. (Kirksey Smith, K)
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Archive of over 450,000 articles
- Database of over 2.1 million cases
- 62,000+ organization-specific pages.
- Daily and real-time news and case alerts on organizations, industries, and customized search queries.
- Significant legal events involving law firms, companies, industries, and government agencies.
- Learn more
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login