Brandon Imber, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated v....

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRANDON IMBER, individually and on Case No. 1:22-cv-00004-HBK behalf of all other similarly situated, 12 ORDER GRANTING NOTICE OF REQUEST Plaintiff, TO SEAL v. (Doc. No. 187) BRUCE LACKEY, PAM LACKEY, LACKEY FAMILY TRUST, COLE SCHARTON, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE OF THE PEOPLE BUSINESS EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN, MIGUEL PAREDES, RICH ROUSH, DEL THACKER, RICHARD DEYOUNG, AND RITCHIE TRUCKING SERVICE HOLDINGS, INC., 20 Defendants.

22 On November 21, 2025, Plaintiff filed a request to seal a 2-page August 8, 2025 letter from Acclaro, the valuation advisors to Defendant Miguel Paredes, the Trustee of the People Business Employee Stock Ownership (the “Ritchie ESOP”) that provides a calculation of the fair market value of Ritchie Trucking Service Holdings, Inc. as of December 31, 2024 incorporating the effects of the Settlement in this case to be filed under seal. (Doc. No. 187). Defendants did not submit an opposition under Local Rule 141(c).

28 The Court has considered the factors set forth in Oregonian Publishing Co. v. U.S. | District Court for the District of Oregon, 920 F.2d 1462 (9th Cir. 1990). The Court finds that, for || the reasons stated in the Plaintiff's request, sealing the August 8, 2025 letter serves a compelling | interest. See, e.g., Hefler v. Wells Fargo & Co., 2018 WL 4207245 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 4, 2018) | (collecting cases) (“There are compelling reasons to keep this information confidential in order to | prevent third parties from utilizing it for the improper purpose of obstructing the settlement and | obtaining higher payouts.”). The Court further finds that, in the absence of closure, the | compelling interests identified by Plaintiff would be harmed. In light of the public filing of its || Notice to Seal, the Court further finds that there are no additional alternatives to sealing the | August 8, 2025 letter that would adequately protect the compelling interests identified by the | Plaintiff.

11 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 12 1. Plaintiff's unopposed request to seal documents (Doc. No. 187) is GRANTED.

13 2. Within five (5) days of this Order, Plaintiff shall provide an electronic copy of the | document to be sealed to the Clerk of Court by email to: ApprovedSealed @caed.uscourts.gov, at | which time the Clerk of Court will file the documents under seal. See Local Rule 141(e)(2)q).

M Dated: _ December 9, 2025 law ZA. foareh Zackte 18 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE