Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 31, 2023

Roberts v. Bloom Energy Corporation

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:19-cv-02935
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Roberts v. Bloom Energy, Judge Gilliam granted the joint motion to seal an opt-out agreement.

Who this affects

The parties’ opt-out agreement is affected because Exhibit 3 must be filed and remain under seal.

What happened

In Roberts v. Bloom Energy Corporation, the court considered the parties’ joint request to file an opt-out agreement under seal.

The court found compelling reasons to keep the agreement confidential, including preventing improper efforts to persuade people to opt out of a settlement or use the agreement’s information to seek higher payments.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted the joint motion and ordered the opt-out agreement, submitted as Exhibit 3, filed under seal in its entirety. The document will remain sealed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Roberts v. Bloom Energy Corporation · No. 4:19-cv-02935
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
Oct. 31, 2023

Background

The parties filed a joint administrative motion under the Northern District of California’s local rules to submit an opt-out agreement under seal. The agreement was attached as Exhibit 3 to their motion.

Court’s Analysis

The court found “compelling reasons” to maintain the agreement’s confidentiality. Citing other cases, the court explained that keeping similar opt-out information confidential can discourage third parties from improperly soliciting class members to opt out and can prevent people from using information about the settlement’s opt-out threshold to seek higher payments or obstruct the settlement.

Ruling

The court stated that the joint motion was GRANTED. It ordered the opt-out agreement filed under seal in its entirety and stated that, under Civil Local Rule 79-5(g)(1), the document would remain sealed.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.