The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
G. H., et al., Case No. 25-cv-01399-RFL
Plaintiffs,
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE
v. SEALING
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BOARD Re: Dkt. No. 49
OF REGENTS, et al.,
Defendants.
On April 8, 2026, Plaintiffs and BCH Oakland executed a Settlement Agreement
resolving Plaintiffs’ claims against all Defendants in this action. (Dkt. No. 49-3.) The
Settlement Agreement is contingent upon the Court’s approval of the minor’s compromise, and
identifies minor Plaintiff G.H. by name. Plaintiffs have filed an unopposed motion requesting
that the Petition for Approval and Settlement Agreement be filed under seal. (Dkt. No. 49.)
However, given that the alleged facts of the case have already been publicly disclosed in the
Complaint (Dkt. No. 1), the authority Plaintiffs cite only supports redacting G.H.’s identifying
information and the amount G.H. will receive in the settlement. See, e.g., Huff v.
Thousandshores, Inc., No. 21-cv-02173-HSG, 2022 WL 547109, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2022).
Plaintiffs have not provided a compelling reason for complete sealing.
Therefore, Plaintiffs are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by June 1, 2026 why the rest
of the Petition for Approval and Settlement Agreement should remain sealed. Plaintiffs must
either provide supplemental authority supporting complete sealing, or they must file an updated
version of Dkt. Nos. 49-3 and 49-4 that redact only G.H.’s identifying information and the
amount G.H. will receive in the settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 18, 2026
RITA F. LIN
United States District Judge