3:22-cv-07668•Hughes et al v. Apple, Inc.
Texte intégral
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 LAUREN HUGHES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. APPLE, INC., Defendant. Case No. 22-cv-07668-VC (TSH) ORDER RE MOTION TO SEAL Re: Dkt. No. 179 The sealing motion at ECF No. 179 is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is granted as to Exhibits A, B, C, D and E. But it’s denied as to the joint discovery letter brief because the redactions are overbroad. Much of the letter brief is just legal argument and does not merit sealing. This denial is without prejudice to Plaintiffs proposing narrowly tailored redactions within five days. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 21, 2025 THOMAS S. HIXSON United States Magistrate Judge Case 3:22-cv-07668-VC Document 184 Filed 10/21/25 Page 1 of 1
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.