Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 23, 2023

Pierce v. East Bay Municipal Utility District

Judge
Alex Tse
Docket
3:21-cv-04325
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Pierce v. East Bay Municipal Utility District, Judge Tse denied defendants’ motion to seal deposition excerpts and ordered public filing.

Who this affects

The defendants must publicly file the deposition excerpts and an unredacted summary-judgment motion; the ruling also preserves public access to those filings.

What happened

In Pierce v. East Bay Municipal Utility District, the defendants asked to keep excerpts from Dorian West Blair’s deposition transcript private. They had submitted the excerpts with their motion for summary judgment.

The court said the excerpts could not be sealed merely because the deposition had been designated confidential. West Blair, formerly the utility district’s diversity and inclusion officer, testified about matters relevant to the case, and the excerpts did not contain information that needed to remain private.

The court denied the defendants’ motion to seal. Judge Alex G. Tse ordered the defendants to file a public version of the excerpts and an unredacted version of their summary-judgment motion by March 3, 2023.

The detailed version

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

Case
Pierce v. East Bay Municipal Utility District · No. 3:21-cv-04325
Judge
Alex Tse
Date
Feb. 23, 2023

Background

The defendants moved to seal excerpts from Dorian West Blair’s deposition transcript. They had submitted the excerpts with their motion for summary judgment. The only stated basis for sealing was that the court had designated West Blair’s deposition as confidential.

Court’s analysis

The court applied the “compelling reasons” standard governing requests to seal documents filed at the summary-judgment stage. It held that a confidentiality designation, by itself, was not a compelling reason to seal deposition excerpts attached to a dispositive motion. The court also noted that West Blair, formerly the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s diversity and inclusion officer, testified about matters relevant to the merits of the case. The submitted excerpts did not reveal anything that needed to be withheld from public view.

Ruling

The court denied the defendants’ motion to seal. It ordered the defendants to file a public version of the West Blair deposition excerpts and an unredacted version of the motion for summary judgment by March 3, 2023. This order addressed sealing and did not decide the summary-judgment motion itself.

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.