| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Redact Portions Of The Compendium Of Evidence In Support Of Plaintiff'S Complaint
Matter on the Law & Motion/Discovery Calendar for Wednesday, July 30, 2025, line 10, 2 - DEFENDANT CLOUDFLARE, INC.'S Motion To Redact Portions Of The Compendium Of Evidence In Support Of Plaintiff'S Complaint
The court grants defendant Cloudflare, Inc.'s motion as follows: Plaintiff Michael Vigil has filed a compendium of exhibits in connection with his complaint. That compendium is presently sealed. By this order, the court permanently seals the compendium and orders the clerk to file publicly a redacted version of the compendium, which Cloudflare has lodged with the court. Vigil does not oppose this relief.
The court concludes that this order is appropriate without findings under Rule of Court 2.550. In Mercury Interactive Corp. v. Klein (2007) 158 Cal.App.4th 60, the appellate court considered what standard applied to materials that were obtained in discovery and attached to a pleading as exhibits. The court stated: "plaintiffs' mere act of attaching the discovery materials as exhibits to the Complaint did not result in them being submitted as a basis for adjudication within the ambit of the rules.
While the importance of a complaint in framing the claims and issues presented in civil litigation cannot be downplayed, we disagree that any material attached to it-such as the discovery material designated confidential pursuant to a duly entered protective order here-necessarily is 'submitted as a basis for adjudication.' The pleadings, including complaints, are not typically evidentiary matters that are submitted to a jury in adjudicating a controversy." (Id. at p. 103.)
The material in the compendium is like that in Mercury Interactive: it is attached to the complaint, but has not been submitted as a basis for adjudication at this stage of the proceedings. Accordingly, no further findings are required to grant this unopposed request.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. = (302/CVA) |