Motion For Reconsideration Of Order Denying Motion To Seal Record
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Wednesday, December 03, 2025, Line 1. PETITIONER ELEN MEDER's Motion For Reconsideration Of Order Denying Motion To Seal Record.
Petitioner Elen Meder's unopposed Motion for Reconsideration of Order denying Motion to Seal Record is DENIED.
Petitioner moves under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(a). A motion for reconsideration by a party under section 1008(a) must be "based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law." (Code of Civ. Proc. 1008(a).) The moving party bears the burden of proving that the alleged "new or different facts, circumstances, or law" could not, with reasonable diligence, have been discovered or produced earlier. (New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 206, 212-213.) This standard is jurisdictional. (See Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(e).)
Petitioner here failed to carry her burden to show new or different facts, circumstances, or law justify reconsideration of the challenged orders. Petitioner's untimely request to take her motion off calendar (made only after the tentative issued) was properly denied (see S.F.L.R., rule 8.2(C)(1); in any event, an erroneous ruling is not a new fact under section 1008(a). The clerk's directive for Petitioner to submit a proposed order verbatim the tentative ruling merely repeated a directive to Petitioner in the tentative ruling itself.
Petitioner's purported service error is not a new fact or circumstance; it easily could have been discovered earlier. Nor is it credible that Petitioner happened to discover her error just after the court issued its tentative ruling denying her motion to seal. In any event, whether her service of the motion was proper is not a fact material to her motion to seal or the court's 10/31/2025 Order.
The parties are ordered each to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the above text and email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the time set for hearing.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) 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 contestdept302tr@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?”
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion 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/JMQ) |