3:22-cv-07668•Hughes et al v. Apple, Inc.
Gesamter Gesetzestext
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 United States District Court Northern District of California UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LAUREN HUGHES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. APPLE, INC., Defendant. Case No. 22-cv-07668-VC (TSH) ORDER RE MOTION TO SEAL Re: Dkt. No. 179 The sealing motion at ECF No. 179 is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is granted as to Exhibits A, B, C, D and E. But it’s denied as to the joint discovery letter brief because the redactions are overbroad. Much of the letter brief is just legal argument and does not merit sealing. This denial is without prejudice to Plaintiffs proposing narrowly tailored redactions within five days. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 21, 2025 THOMAS S. HIXSON United States Magistrate Judge Case 3:22-cv-07668-VC Document 184 Filed 10/21/25 Page 1 of 1
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.