Painters and Allied Trades District Council 82 Health Care Fund v. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Ltd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES— GENERAL Case No. = 2:17-cv-07223-JWH-AS Date May 26, 2023 Title Painters & Allied Trades Dist. Council 82 Health Care Fund v. Takeda Pharm. Co. Ltd. Present: The Honorable JOHN W. HOLCOMB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Erica Bustos for Clarissa Lara Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present Proceedings: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE UNSEALING ORDERS [ECF Nos. 325 & 326] (INCHAMBERS) On May 22, 2023, the Court denied the motion of Defendants Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited and Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. to exclude the testimony of William S. Comanor—the expert witness of Plaintiffs Painters and Allied Trades District Council 82 Health Care Fund and Annie M.

Snyder (jointly, “Plaintiffs” Two days later, the Court issued its order on Plaintiffs motion to certify two classes under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: a National Third-Party Payer Class and a California Consumer Class.”

The Court filed both the Comanor Order and the Class Certification Order under seal because many of the documents upon which the Court relied for its analysis, and that the Court quoted therein, were filed under seal. However, it appears to the Court that neither the Comanor Order nor the Class Certification Order contains any confidential or sensitive information, and, consequently, that 1 See Order on Defs.’ Mot. to Exclude Pls.’ Expert Witness William S. Comanor (the “Comanor Order”) [ECF No. 325].

2 See Mem. Op. and Order on Mot. for Class Certification (the “Class Certification Order”) [ECF No. 326].

Page 1 of 2 ONERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk cla neither order should remain under seal. See, e.g., Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Unless a particular court record is one traditionally kept secret, a strong presumption in favor of access is the starting point.”) (citation and quotations omitted).

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. The parties are DIRECTED to confer forthwith regarding the propriety of the Comanor Order and the Class Certification Order remaining under seal.

2. The parties are ORDERED to show cause why either the Comanor Order or the Class Certification Order should remain under seal. The parties shall file their respective responses to this OSC no later than June 2, 2023.

3. If any party contends that either the Comanor Order or the Class Certification Order should remain under seal, then that party is DIRECTED to propose (as a part of its response to this OSC) a redacted version that could be publicly available.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CIVIL MINUTES—