Conner v. Quora, Inc., a Delaware corporation ( 2020 )

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 JERI CONNOR, Case No. 18-cv-07597-BLF 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S 9 v. ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 10 QUORA, INC., [Re: ECF 167] 11 Defendant. 12 13 Before the Court is Defendant’s administrative motion to file under seal materials 14 submitted in support of its motion for summary judgment. See Mot., ECF 167. Defendant makes 15 its request on the basis of the Court’s previous order granting Defendant’s motion to file under 16 seal portions of its motion for summary judgment and because the materials contain commercially 17 sensitive information. Id. Plaintiff did not file an opposition. Defendant further clarified its sealing 18 request on October 28, 2020, in light of certain documents that have since been rendered moot. 19 For the reasons stated below, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED. 20 I. LEGAL STANDARD 21 “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 22 and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and County of 23 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 24 U.S. 589, 597 n.7 (1978)). Consequently, filings that are “more than tangentially related to the 25 merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. 26 for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101-02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are 27 only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. 1 Sealing motions filed in this district also must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of 2 sealable material, and must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). Under Civil 3 Local Rule 79-6(d), the submitting party must attach a “proposed order that is narrowly tailored to 4 seal only the sealable material” which “lists in table format each document or portion thereof that 5 is sought to be sealed.” In addition, a party moving to seal a document in whole or in part must file 6 a declaration establishing that the identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). 7 “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain documents 8 as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are sealable.” Id. 9 Where the moving party requests sealing of documents because they have been designated 10 confidential by another party or a non-party under a protective order, the burden of establishing 11 adequate reasons for sealing is placed on the designating party or non-party. Civ. L.R. 79-5(e). 12 The moving party must file a proof of service showing that the designating party or non-party has 13 been given notice of the motion to seal. Id. “Within 4 days of the filing of the Administrative 14 Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration . . . establishing that all of 15 the designated material is sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1). “If the Designating Party does not file a 16 responsive declaration . . . and the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal is denied, the 17 Submitting Party may file the document in the public record no earlier than 4 days, and no later 18 than 10 days, after the motion is denied.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(2). 19 II. DISCUSSION 20 Documents containing commercially sensitive information have been held sealable in this 21 Circuit. See, e.g., In re Elec. Arts, Inc., 298 F. App’x 568, 569 (9th Cir. 2008) (sealing exhibit 22 containing trade secrets and adopting definition of trade secret as “any formula, pattern, device or 23 compilation of information which is used in one’s business, and which gives him an opportunity to 24 obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it”). The Court has reviewed 25 Defendant’s sealing motion and the declarations in support thereof. The Court finds that the 26 Defendant has articulated compelling reasons to seal certain portions of the cited brief and 27 exhibits. The proposed redactions are generally narrowly tailored. The Court’s rulings on the 1 ECF No. Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning 2 Supplemental Declaration GRANTED as to the portions Defendant directs the 167-4 3 of Zhe Fu in Support of of the documents highlighted Court to its prior Quora’s Motion for at: order on the motion to 4 Summary Judgment ¶¶ 2; 3; 4; 5; 6 seal Defendant’s motion for summary 5 judgment. Decl. of Rebekah Guyon ¶ 2, 6 ECF 167-2. The 7 Court does find that this document 8 contains proprietary, non-public, and 9 competitively sensitive details. 10 Declaration of Rebekah GRANTED as to the portions Defendant directs the 167-6 11 Guyon in Support of of the document highlighted Court to its prior Opposition to Platintiff’s at: order on the motion to 12 Feb. R. Civ. Pr. 56(d) 3:28-4:1; seal Defendant’s request 4:4; motion for summary 13 4:7-8; judgment. Decl. of 4:22 Rebekah Guyon ¶ 2, 14 ECF 167-2. The 15 Court does find that this document 16 contains proprietary, non-public, and 17 competitively 18 sensitive details. Declaration of Paula GRANTED as to the portions This document 167-101 19 Griffin in Support of of the document highlighted contains proprietary, Motion to Exclude at: non-public, and 20 Declaration of David Sun ¶¶ 3; 4; 5; 6; 7 competitively sensitive technical 21 details. Decl. of Zhe 22 Fu ¶ 5, ECF 167-1. Excerpts of deposition of GRANTED as to the portions This document 167-12 23 Paula Griffin of the document highlighted contains proprietary, at: non-public, and 24 28:1-25; competitively 42:2-18; sensitive technical 25 49:13-23: details. Decl. of Zhe 26 50:9-25; Fu ¶¶ 6-8. 51:6-52:25; 27 53:4-25; 1 55:1-22; 2 56:4-25; 57:12-25; 3 58:1-5; 58:11-16; 4 58:19-22; 60:10-14; 5 60:20-21; 6 94:4-13; 107:1-6; 7 107:11; 117:1-25; 8 118:1-11 GRANTED as to the portions Defendant directs the 9 167-82 Defendant’s initial Reply of the document highlighted Court to its prior 10 in support of its Motion at: order on the motion to 2:13-15; seal Defendant’s 11 for Summary Judgment 4:20-24; motion for summary 7:28-8:1; judgment. Decl. of 12 8:3; Rebekah Guyon ¶ 2, 8:21; ECF 167-2. The 13 9:5-6; Court does find that 14 9:23-24; this document 10:14-15; contains proprietary, 15 11:10-15; non-public, and 11:26; competitively 16 14:24-25 sensitive details. 17 167-143 Defendant’s Motion to GRANTED as to the portions This document Exclude Plaintiff’s of the document highlighted contains proprietary, 18 Declaration of David Sun at: non-public, and 4:6-7; competitively 19 4:11-12; sensitive technical 4:17-23; details. Decl. of 20 4:27-5:1; Rebekah Guyon ¶ 5. 21 5:3-4; 5:9-10; 22 5:15-20; 5:23-24; 23 7:3-5; 8:18-20; 24 8:24-27; 25 9:2; 26 2 This Document has been superseded in lieu of the Court’s October 14, 2020 Order. See Order, 27 ECF 169. 9:5; HEP 2 3 4 || Tt. ORDER 5 For the reasons set forth herein, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s administrative motion to 6 file under seal. 7 8 || Dated: October 28, 2020 kom □□ ham tn) 9 10 BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge ll a 12 13 14 15 16 = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28