Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McCloud v. Goodyear Dunlop Tires North America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION


June 21, 2006

TRISH LEE MCCLOUD, BY AND THROUGH HER LEGAL GUARDIAN, CANDY L. HALL, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GOODYEAR DUNLOP TIRES NORTH AMERICA, LTD. AND THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.
WILLIAM BOOKER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GOODYEAR DUNLOP TIRES NORTH AMERICA, LTD. AND THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joe Billy McDade United States District Judge

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff, Trish Lee McCloud's ("McCloud") Motion to File Under Seal [Doc. #172]. In particular, McCloud argues that Exhibits 7 and 17 attached to her Memorandum of Law and Evidence in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Bar the Testimony of Derian, Woehrle and Kasner [Doc. #170] are confidential documents which must be filed under seal pursuant to paragraph 9 of the Protective Order entered in this states as follows:

If confidential documents are to be filed in support of a motion, or used at trial, the parties shall, before filing the documents or filing a motion to seal the documents, make a good faith effort to redact the confidential information in such a manner that the document still contains the information required for the Court's consideration. Only if redaction is not possible may a party move for leave to file the document under seal. The motion shall explain how the document(s) in question meet the standards for filing sealed documents as discussed in Citizens First Nat'l Bank of Princeton v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 178 F.3d 943 (7th Cir. 1999), and its progeny.

Any motion for leave to file documents under seal, together with supporting information, shall be submitted for an in camera review to the presiding judge via email at the email addresses specified in the Central District's Administrative Procedures for Filing, Signing, and Verifying Pleadings and Papers by electronic Means in Civil Cases, § III. The pleading or documents that the party wishes to be filed under seal shall be attached as an Exhibit.

[Doc. #71, ¶ 9] (emphases added).

Here, McCloud has failed to follow any of the procedures outlined above in paragraph 9 of the Protective Order.

Therefore, at the present time, there is no justification for placing Exhibits 7 and 17 under seal. McCloud, nevertheless, will be given 14 days from the date of this Order to comply in full with paragraph 9 of the Protective Order. If McCloud fails to comply with paragraph 9 within the allotted time frame, this Court will deny her Motion to File Documents Under Seal.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that McCloud will be given 14 days from the date of this Order to comply in full with paragraph 9 of the Protective Order [Doc. #71], or her Motion to File Documents Under Seal [Doc. #172] will be denied.

20060621

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.