Attia v. Oura Ring, Inc. et al

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
PETER ATTIA,
Plaintiff,
v.
OURARING INC., et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 23-cv-03433-HSG (LJC)
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
NON-COMPLIANT FILINGS AT ECF
NOS. 185 AND 185-1
Re: Dkt. Nos. 183, 185, 185-1.
On February 19, 2026 the Court issued an order that resolved disputes concerning alleged
violations of the protective order and addressed certain administrative motions to seal. ECF
No. 183.1 Among other things, the Court denied Plaintiff’s administrative motion to seal portions
of its letter brief filed at ECF No. 174 as well as Exhibit 8 to the Declaration of Charmaine G. Yu
in Support of Plaintiff’s Letter Brief, ECF No. 176. Accordingly, the Court ordered Plaintiff to
file no later than February 27, 2026 unredacted versions of the discovery letter and supporting
declaration previously filed on February 11, 2026 at ECF Nos. 177 and 177-1. ECF No. 183 at 3.
Instead, Plaintiff filed nearly identical versions of the discovery letter and supporting declaration
that both contained new dates, February 24, 2024, reflecting the date of re-filing, as opposed to the
date that the letter and declaration were originally signed. See ECF No. 185 and 185-1. Plaintiff’s
February 24, 2026 filings are not compliant with the Court’s order because they are not the
identical, unredacted versions of material filed on February 11, 2026 as attachments to Plaintiff’s
administration motion to seal at ECF Nos. 176-4 and 176-5.
1Also in its February 19, 2026 Order, the Court explained that the filings at ECF Nos. 143, 173,
and 173-1 would not be kept under seal. ECF No. 183 at 3. These filings will according be
unlocked and made available on the public docket.
Case 4:23-cv-03433-HSG Document 359 Filed 07/21/26 Page 1 of 2

2
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
Accordingly, the erroneous and non-compliant discovery letter filed at ECF Nos. 185 is
stricken and to correct the docket and bring it into to compliance with the Court’s order, the Court
sua sponte files the unredacted letter previously filed under seal at ECF No. 176-4 as Attachment
A to this Order. The supporting declaration containing the new date, as well as its exhibits, filed
at ECF No. 185-1, are stricken. The unredacted Exhibit 8, previously filed under seal at ECF No.
176-5, is filed by this Court as Attachment B to this Order.
Additionally, the Court directs Plaintiff to take care, following the Court’s denial of the
entirety of an administrative motion to seal, to re-file unredacted versions of filings that were
previously filed under seal as attachments to administrative motions to seal and to forgo any
modifications to the original filed document. Ordinarily, unless the Court grants in full or in part a
motion to seal, the unredacted versions of the subject documents that were filed provisionally
under seal as attachments to the administrative motion to file under seal shall be re-filed on the
public docket with no modifications. If the Court grants in part a motion to seal, the order will
explain what portions are approved for sealing, and the version that is refiled on the public docket
shall be modified only to the extent necessary to redact information that has been approved for
sealing and to remove redactions where the Court has ordered that certain information shall be
visible to the public. For more information regarding the process for filing under seal, the Court
directs that parties to the Court’s webpage addressing e-filing case documents,
https://cand.uscourts.gov/cases-e-filing/cmecf-information/e-filing-case-documents.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 21, 2026
LISA J. CISNEROS
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:23-cv-03433-HSG Document 359 Filed 07/21/26 Page 2 of 2