4:23-cv-03277•Morris v. Wells Fargo & Company et al
Full text
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 United States District Court Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ANTHONY MORRIS, Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Case No. 23-cv-03277-HSG ORDER DENYING MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER ANOTHER PARTY’S MATERIAL SHOULD BE SEALED Re: Dkt. No. 110 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to consider whether another party’s material should be sealed. Dkt. No. 110 (discussing redactions in Dkt. No. 109 and 109-2). Defendants state that the documents may be unsealed and filed publicly on the docket. Dkt. No. 112. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion, Dkt. No. 110, and DIRECTS Plaintiff to file an unredacted version of Dkt. No. 109 on the public docket within 7 days of this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ______________________________________ HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. United States District Judge 2/12/2026 Case 4:23-cv-03277-HSG Document 165 Filed 02/12/26 Page 1 of 1
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.