Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc. ( 2023 )

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 SKILLZ PLATFORM INC., Case No. 21-cv-02436-BLF 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING RENEWED 9 v. MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL TRANSCRIPT OF OCTOBER 25, 2023 10 AVIAGAMES INC., HEARING 11 Defendant. [Re: ECF No. 451] 12 13 Before the Court is Defendant AviaGames Inc.’s Renewed Administrative Motion to File 14 Under Seal the transcript of the October 5, 2023 hearing. ECF No. 451. The Court has considered 15 the motion and opposition, and its ruling is laid out below. 16 I. LEGAL STANDARD 17 “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 18 and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of 19 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 20 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are 21 “more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of 22 “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 23 1101–02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed 24 upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097. 25 In addition, in this district, all parties requesting sealing must comply with Civil Local 26 Rule 79-5. That rule requires, inter alia, the moving party to provide “the reasons for keeping a 27 document under seal, including an explanation of: (i) the legitimate private or public interests that 1 alternative to sealing is not sufficient.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(1). Further, Civil Local Rule 79-5 2 requires the moving party to provide “evidentiary support from declarations where necessary.” 3 Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(2). And the proposed order must be “narrowly tailored to seal only the sealable 4 material.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(3). 5 II. DISCUSSION 6 As the Court stated previously, it follows other courts in this district and finds that the 7 “good cause” standard applies to sealing the hearing, at which the Court heard argument on the 8 emergency motion for a protective order. See In re Google RTB Consumer Priv. Litig., No. 9 21CV02155YGRVKD, 2023 WL 5667891, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2023) (applying the “good 10 cause” standard to sealing portions of a discovery hearing transcript); Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google 11 Inc., No. 10CV03561WHADMR, 2016 WL 11810331, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2016) (same). 12 The Court previously denied without prejudice AviaGames’ request to seal portions of the 13 October 5, 2023 hearing, finding that AviaGames’ requested redactions were not narrowly 14 tailored. See ECF No. 391. AviaGames has now filed a renewed administrative motion to file 15 under seal portions of the October 5, 2023 hearing. ECF No. 451. AviaGames has submitted 16 more narrow redactions and argues that good cause exists to seal the highlighted portions of the 17 transcript because they contain confidential information involving AviaGames’ trade secrets and 18 business information. Id. at 2. Skillz did not file an opposition to the motion. 19 Good cause exists to seal trade secrets. Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. Confidential source 20 code and confidential business information that would harm a party’s competitive standing meet 21 the compelling reasons standard, and thus also meet the “less exacting” good cause standard. See 22 Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1097; see also Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., No. 11- 23 CV-01846-LHK, 2012 WL 6115623, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2012) (finding that “[c]onfidential 24 source code clearly meets the definition of a trade secret,” and meets the compelling reasons 25 standard); Jam Cellars, Inc. v. Wine Grp. LLC, No. 19-cv-01878-HSG, 2020 WL 5576346, at *2 26 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 17, 2020) (finding compelling reasons for “confidential business and proprietary 27 information relating to the operations of both Plaintiff and Defendant”); Fed. Trade Comm’n v. 1 compelling reasons for “information that, if published, may harm [a party’s] or third parties’ 2 || competitive standing and divulges terms of confidential contracts, contract negotiations, or trade 3 secrets”); In re Elec. Arts, Inc., 298 F. App’x 568, 569 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding sealable “business 4 || information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing”). 5 The Court finds good cause to seal the information identified in the highlighted portions of 6 || the transcript and finds that AviaGames’ renewed request to seal is “narrowly tailored to seal only 7 the sealable material.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(3). 8 The Court rules as follows: ° ECF No. PortionstoSeal | Ruling 10 451-2 Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED as containing Proceedings from the Portions confidential business 11 October 5, 2023 information, the release of which Hearing would cause a party competitive 12 harm. (13 | 1 ORDER For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant AviaGames Inc.’s 2 15 Renewed Administrative Motion to File Under Seal the transcript of the October 5, 2023 hearing A 16 (ECF No. 451) is GRANTED. AviaGames SHALL file a redacted version of the transcript on the 17 || public docket within 7 days of the date of this Order. 18 19 || Dated: December 4, 2023 HX a 20 BETH LABSON FREEMAN 21 United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28