Lufthansa Technik v. Panasonic Avionics Corporation ( 2021 )

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 In the Matter of the Application of CASE NO. C17-1453-JCC LUFTHANSA TECHNIK AG, Petitioner, 10 for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1782 to ORDER 11 Take Discovery, Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of Respondent 12 Panasonic Avionics Corporation for Use in Foreign Proceedings 13 14 15 This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner’s motion to seal (Dkt. No. 158) certain 16 exhibits to the Declaration of Lawrence D. Rosenberg (Dkt. No. 159). 17 “[T]here is a strong presumption of public access to [the Court’s] files.” W.D. Wash. 18 Local Civ. R. 5(g)(3). The presumption of public access may be overcome if the Court finds a 19 compelling reason to seal and articulates a factual basis for its decision. Kamakana v. City & Cty. 20 of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006). 21 The Court previously entered the parties’ stipulated protective orders. (Dkt. Nos. 41, 59, 22 85, 117.) Intervenor Astronics Advanced Electronic Systems Corp. (“AES”) designated the 23 information included in the sealed exhibits as “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” pursuant to those 24 protective orders. (Dkt. No. 158-1.) Having reviewed the exhibits, the Court agrees they contain 25 sensitive information that falls within the scope of the protective orders entered by the Court. 26 Thus, a compelling reason to seal exists that overcomes the presumption of public access to the 1 information at issue. 2 For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner’s motion to seal (Dkt. No. 158) is GRANTED. The 3 Clerk is DIRECTED to maintain Docket Number 159 under seal. 4 DATED this 16th day of December 2021. A 5 6 7 John C. Coughenour 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26