Mejia v. RXO Last Mile
- Susan Illston
- 3:22-cv-08976
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Maynor Mejia v. RXO Last Mile, Judge Illston granted in part and denied in part a motion to seal exhibits.
Maynor Mejia and RXO Last Mile, Inc.; the order determines which exhibits filed with the class-certification materials may remain sealed.
What happened
In Maynor Mejia v. RXO Last Mile, Inc., the plaintiff asked the court to seal materials filed with his motion for class certification. The materials included documents that RXO Last Mile had marked confidential under a protective order.
The court granted the request to seal Exhibits 20, 21, 22, and 23 in full. It denied the request for Exhibits 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 25, and ordered the plaintiff to file unsealed versions of those exhibits by August 21, 2026.
Judge Susan Illston ruled that the motion was granted in part and denied in part. The order concerned only whether the listed exhibits could remain sealed; the opinion does not decide the class-certification motion itself.
The detailed version
- Mejia v. RXO Last Mile · No. 3:22-cv-08976
- Susan Illston
- Aug. 18, 2026
Background
Plaintiff Maynor Mejia filed an administrative motion asking the court to consider whether materials designated confidential by defendant RXO Last Mile, Inc. should be sealed. The motion was filed in connection with the plaintiff’s motion for class certification. The supporting Compendium of Evidence contained materials RXO had designated “CONFIDENTIAL” under a stipulated protective order.
The plaintiff’s motion referenced 16 exhibits. RXO, as the party that designated the materials confidential, asked to keep four exhibits sealed: Exhibits 20 through 23. The court stated that RXO had the burden of showing that the materials met the applicable standard for sealing under the governing local rule and Ninth Circuit law.
Ruling
The court granted the request to seal Exhibits 20, 21, 22, and 23 in their entirety. The exhibits were identified as training materials, a carrier settlement routing playbook, a delivery service agreement addendum and rate schedules, and payment schedules.
The court denied the request to seal Exhibits 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 25. The court ordered the plaintiff to file unsealed versions of those exhibits on the docket by August 21, 2026.
Disposition
Judge Susan Illston ordered that the plaintiff’s motion to file under seal was granted in part and denied in part. This order addressed the sealing of exhibits and did not rule on the motion for class certification.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.