Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 9, 2022

DNA Sports Performance Lab, Inc. v. Major League Baseball

Judge
William Alsup
Docket
3:20-cv-00546
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureEvidence
In one sentence

In DNA Sports Performance Lab v. Major League Baseball, Judge Alsup denied a sealing motion because plaintiff supplied no supporting declaration, so the material goes public.

Who this affects

The ruling affects the parties and the accounting material that will be placed on the public docket.

What happened

In DNA Sports Performance Lab, Inc. v. Major League Baseball, a prior order allowed the League and Union to file plaintiff’s accounting of funds temporarily under seal. The League then filed a motion concerning whether another party’s material should remain sealed.

The court’s local rule gave the party that designated the material seven days to file a declaration supporting sealing. Two weeks passed without plaintiff filing that declaration.

Because there was no factual support for sealing, Judge William Alsup denied the motion and ordered that the material be placed on the public docket.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
DNA Sports Performance Lab, Inc. v. Major League Baseball · No. 3:20-cv-00546
Judge
William Alsup
Date
Sept. 9, 2022

Background

A prior order instructed the League and Union to file plaintiff’s accounting of funds conditionally under seal. The League filed a motion asking the court to consider whether another party’s material should be sealed.

Analysis

Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(f)(3), the party that designated material as confidential had seven days to file a declaration supporting sealing. Two weeks passed, and plaintiff did not file the required declaration. The court found no factual support justifying sealing.

Disposition

Judge William Alsup denied the motion to seal. The material will be placed on the public docket.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.