AssuredPartners of California Insurance Services LLC v. Pahl et al

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
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AssuredPartners of California Insurance
Services LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
Mary Pahl, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-25-00693-TUC-RM
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal (Doc. 54) and Defendants’
Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 55). For the following
reasons, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal, and grant Defendants’ Motion to
Strike Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
I. Motion to Seal
In Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal, Plaintiff requests permission to file under seal Exhibit
2-7 and Exhibit 7 to its Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (Doc. 54.) Plaintiff has not
separately lodged a copy of either of these Exhibits with the Court. Plaintiff explains that
it does not believe that these exhibits need to be sealed, but that Defendants have designated
them as Confidential pursuant to the Court’s February 5, 2026 Protective Order (Doc. 24).
It does not appear that Plaintiff has conferred with Defendants regarding whether
Defendants would be willing to remove the Confidential designation. (See Doc. 54.)
The Court has already denied a Motion to Seal by Plaintiff for failure to comply
with the Local Rules, and explained the procedures that a party must follow when filing a
Case 4:25-cv-00693-RM Document 58 Filed 04/08/26 Page 1 of 4

- 2 -
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
Motion to Seal in this Court. (Doc. 48.) The Court also explained the procedures a party
must follow when seeking to file a document designated as confidential by another party
pursuant to a protective order or confidentiality agreement. (Id.) Plaintiff’s currently
pending Motion to Seal must again be denied for failure to comply with the applicable
Local Rules.
Whenever a party seeks to file a document under seal, “[t]he document or documents
that are the subject of any such motion . . . must be lodged with the Court separately[.]”
Local Rule of Civil Procedure (“LRCiv”) 5.6(b). When seeking to file a document
designated as confidential by another party pursuant to a protective order or confidentiality
agreement, a party must follow additional procedures, including lodging the document
under seal, and filing and serving a “notice of lodging summarizing the parties’ dispute and
setting forth the submitting party’s position, accompanied by a certification that the parties
have conferred in good faith and were unable to agree about whether the document” should
be filed under seal. LRCiv 5.6(d). “Within fourteen (14) days after service of the notice,
the designating party must file and serve either a notice withdrawing the confidentiality
designation or a motion to seal and a supporting memorandum that sets forth the facts and
legal authority justifying the filing of the document (or proposed filing) under seal.” Id.
Here, Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal does not comply with the applicable Local Rules
because Plaintiff has not lodged a copy of the proposed Exhibits with the Court and has
not included a certification that the parties conferred in good faith regarding the proposed
Exhibits. (Doc. 54.) The Motion to Seal will accordingly be denied.
II. Motion to Strike
In Defendants’ Motion to Strike, Defendants assert that Plaintiff’s Motion for
Preliminary Injunction must be stricken for failure to comply with LRCiv 7.2(e), which
provides that “a motion including its supporting memorandum . . . may not exceed
seventeen (17) pages, exclusive of attachments and any required statement of facts.” (Doc.
55.) Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and its supporting memorandum total 32
pages. (Docs. 52, 53.) In its response to the Motion to Strike, Plaintiff asserts that there is
Case 4:25-cv-00693-RM Document 58 Filed 04/08/26 Page 2 of 4

- 3 -
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
no violation of LRCiv 7.2(e) because the statement of facts portion of the Motion for
Preliminary Injunction should not be counted, citing LRCiv 7.2(e)’s mandate that any
“required statement of facts” be excluded from page totals. (Doc. 56.)
“Required statements of fact are reserved for motions such as motions for summary
judgment.” Cambra v. Universal Weather & Aviation LLC, No. CV-20-02234-PHX-DJH,
2021 WL 4319212 at *2 n.1 (D. Ariz. Sept. 22, 2021) (citing LRCiv 56.1(a)). “It is not the
case that a party can evade the page limit on briefing by simply saying a statement of facts
was necessary to its argument.” Id. In this Court, there is no required statement of facts for
a motion for preliminary injunction. Therefore, Plaintiff’s argument that its statement of
facts must not be counted in the page total is unavailing. While the Court would in certain
circumstances be inclined to excuse a de minimis violation of the applicable page limits,
here, Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction is nearly double the length allowed.
Since this cannot be deemed a minor violation of the Local Rules, the Court will grant
Defendants’ Motion to Strike. Plaintiffs may refile a Motion for Preliminary Injunction
compliant with applicable page limits within two days of the date this Order is filed. If
Plaintiffs are unable to shorten the Motion for Preliminary injunction sufficiently to comply
with the standard page limit, Plaintiffs may file a motion seeking leave to exceed the page
limit, but any such motion must establish good cause for exceeding the standard page limit.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal (Doc. 54) is denied.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
Case 4:25-cv-00693-RM Document 58 Filed 04/08/26 Page 3 of 4

- 4 -
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
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Doc. 55) is
granted. Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 52) is stricken. Plaintiff may
refile a compliant Motion for Preliminary Injunction, as set forth above, within two (2)
days of the date this Order is filed.
Dated this 8th day of April, 2026.
Case 4:25-cv-00693-RM Document 58 Filed 04/08/26 Page 4 of 4