East West Bank v. Shanker ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 EAST WEST BANK, Case No. 20-cv-07364-WHO 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 9 v. TEMPORARY STAY PENDING RESOLUTION OF ARBITRABILITY 10 SUKEERT SHANKER, et al., OF CLAIMS 11 Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 120, 121 12 13 Defendants Sukeert Shanker and Aeldra Financial, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) have 14 filed a motion for a temporary stay of the case pending the resolution of the arbitrability of the 15 claims. Dkt. No. 121. Plaintiff East West Bank (“EWB”) does not oppose. Dkt. No. 138. 16 Defendants’ motion is therefore GRANTED. This action is stayed until I rule on Defendants’ 17 motions to compel arbitration, Dkt. Nos. 114-4, 116-4, except that Defendants shall continue to 18 comply with the preliminary injunction order, Dkt. No. 101, and the order compelling discovery, 19 Dkt. No. 106. The parties shall also continue to engage in ongoing mediation proceedings. 20 Within 14 days following the ruling on Defendants’ motions to compel arbitration, the parties will 21 meet and confer and, if necessary, provide a joint statement addressing the need for the setting of 22 any case deadlines previously set in Dkt. No. 82 and providing the parties’ proposed deadlines for 23 same. 24 Defendants have also filed an administrative motion to seal the motion for a temporary 25 stay. Dkt. No. 120. A party seeking to seal court records must overcome a strong presumption in 26 favor of the public’s right to access those records. See Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 27 809 F.3d 1092, 1096 (9th Cir. 2016), cert. denied sub nom. FCA U.S. LLC v. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 1 for a temporary stay is a nondispositive motion. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1097. “There 2 || may be ‘good cause’ to seal records that are privileged, contain trade secrets, contain confidential 3 research, development or commercial information, or if disclosure of the information might harm 4 || alitigant’s competitive standing.” See Dugan v. Lloyds TSB Bank, PLC, No. 12-CV-2549-WHA, 5 || 2013 WL 1435223, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2013). 6 EWB seeks to seal commercially sensitive information concerning its employment 7 policies, such as language from its proprietary employee handbook regarding its employee dispute 8 || resolution process. Dkt. No. 139 44. Specifically, EWB seeks to seal information related to its 9 arbitration agreement with employees. Dkt. No. 120-4. EWB claims that if the information is 10 || disclosed it will enable competitors to know the terms by which EWB and its employees are 11 bound. Dkt. No. 139 44. But the information does not contain trade secrets or confidential 12 || information. Instead, it relates to common aspects of arbitration agreements, such as whether 5 13 discovery is allowed or whether the arbitrator can consider dispositive motions. It is unclear how 14 || such information will harm EWB’s competitive standing if disclosed. EWB does not cite any 3 15 authority supporting its request to seal this kind of information. Accordingly, the administrative 16 || motion to seal the motion for a temporary stay is DENIED. The clerk shall UNSEAL Dkt. No. | 120-4, 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 Dated: August 31, 2021 21 . \f 22 3 illiam H. Orrick United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28