Little v. Pacific Seafood Procurement, LLC et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BRAND LITTLE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
PACIFIC SEAFOOD PROCUREMENT,
LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 23-cv-01098-AGT
ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL
Re: Dkt. Nos. 481, 489, 499, 525
The Court denies the pending administrative motions to consider whether another
party’s material should be sealed. Dkts. 481, 489, 499, 525. The designating parties didn’t
file statements in support of sealing, as required. Civil L.R. 79-5(f)(3). The Court will, how-
ever, allow a personal phone number to be redacted in Exhibit H to Dkt. 481, as Pacific
Seafood, a non-designating party, requested. Dkt. 495.
By January 16, 2026, the moving parties must file unredacted versions of the docu-
ments covered by the pending sealing motions, redacting only the phone number referenced
above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 8, 2026
______________________________
Alex G. Tse
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:23-cv-01098-AGT Document 565 Filed 01/08/26 Page 1 of 1