Napleton Orlando Imports, LLC v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MDL No. 2672 CRB (JSC) IN RE: VOLKSWAGEN “CLEAN DIESEL” 8 MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION ORDER (I) DENYING MOTION FOR 9 _____________________________________/ CLASS CERTIFICATION, (II) 10 This Order Relates To: DENYING MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY, AND (III) MDL Dkt. Nos. 6386, 6387, 6605, 6821, 11 GRANTING MOTIONS TO SEAL 6825, 6827 12 Napleton, No. 3:16-cv-2086-CRB 13 _____________________________________/ 14 15 In a separate Order issued today, the Court granted the Bosch defendants’ motion for 16 summary judgment on all of the named-plaintiff-dealerships’ claims. (See MDL Dkt. No. 6956.) 17 In light of that decision, the Court now DENIES as moot (i) the dealers’ motion for class 18 certification (see MDL Dkt. No. 6387), and (ii) the dealers’ motion to exclude an expert report that 19 the Bosch defendants submitted in opposition to class certification (see MDL Dkt. No. 6827). 20 The Court also addresses several motions to seal. The dealers and the Bosch defendants 21 seek to seal numerous exhibits that they included with their briefing on class certification and on 22 the motion to exclude. (See MDL Dkt. Nos. 6386, 6605, 6821, 6825.) Many of the exhibits 23 identify technical details about the Bosch defendants’ emissions software. Others detail the 24 dealers’ finances. 25 If the Court had considered the motion for class certification and the motion to exclude, the 26 parties’ interests in keeping these exhibits confidential may not have outweighed the public’s right 27 of access. However, because the Court did not consider the motions—and denied them as moot— 1 based on the public policies of “judicial accountability” and “education about the judicial 2 process.” Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 3 2002). For the exhibits in question, these policies carry little weight. To understand the judicial 4 || process, the public may review the parties’ briefing and evidence (and the Court’s Order) on 5 summary judgment. Those documents are publicly available and reveal how this case was 6 decided. The exhibits to the motion for class certification and to the motion to exclude, in 7 contrast, do not offer insight into the judicial process, because the Court did not consider them. 8 The parties have an interest in keeping their technical and financial information 9 || confidential. Although that interest is not absolute, it outweighs the public’s right of access under 10 || the circumstances. The Court therefore GRANTS the parties’ motions to seal. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: December 6, 2019 ao 14 CHARLES R. BREYER United States District Judge 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28