1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ZEST ANCHORS, LLC d/b/a Zest Case No.: 22-CV-230 TWR (NLS) DentalSolutions and ZEST IP 12 HOLDINGS, LLC, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 13 UNOPPOSED MOTION TO FILE Plaintiffs, EXHIBIT A IN SUPPORT OF 14 v. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE 15 AND DISMISS ZIMVIE INC.’S GERYON VENTURES, LLC d/b/a COUNTERCLAIMS AND 16 DESS-USA and TERRATS MEDICAL REFERENCES THERETO UNDER SOCIEDAD LIMITADA, 17 SEAL Defendants, 18 (ECF Nos. 93, 94) 19 BIOMET 3I, LLC d/b/a ZimVie, 20 Intervenor-Defendant. 21 22 Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs Zest Anchors, LLC d/b/a Zest 23 DentalSolutions and Zest IP Holdings, LLC’s Unopposed Motion to File Exhibit A in 24 Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike and Dismiss ZimVie Inc.’s Counterclaims (“Mot. 25 to Strike”) and References Thereto Under Seal (“Mot. to Seal,” ECF No. 93), in which 26 Plaintiffs seek to file under seal the Distribution Agreement between Plaintiffs and 27 Intervenor-Defendant Biomet 3i, LLC d/b/a ZimVie dated September 2, 2016, as well as 28 references to the Distribution Agreement in their Motion to Strike. (See generally Mot. to 1 ECF No. 93-1 (“Seal Mem.”).) Although the Distribution Agreement expired on 2 || September 2, 2021, (see Seal Mem. at 2-3), Plaintiffs contend that compelling reasons exist 3 file the Distribution Agreement and references to it under seal because the terms are 4 ||“highly sensitive,” (see id. at 3), and public disclosure of them would allow other 5 distributors to gain a commercial advantage in future negotiations, (see id. (quoting 6 || Pecover v. Elec. Arts, Inc., No. C 08-2820 CW, 2013 WL 174063, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 7 2013)), and competitors could undercut Zest on the market. (See id. at 4 (quoting Nicolosi 8 || Distrib. v. Finishmaster, Inc., No. 18-cv-03587-BLF, 2018 WL 10758114, at *2 (N.D. Cal. 9 || Aug. 28, 2018)). 10 Having reviewed the Distribution Agreement and proposed redactions to Plaintiffs’ 11 |}memorandum in support of its Motion to Strike, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have 12 || met their burden of demonstrating compelling reasons to file them under seal. The Court 13 therefore GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal (ECF No. 93). Accordingly, the Clerk of 14 ||the Court SHALL FILE UNDER SEAL Plaintiffs’ Exhibit A and unredacted 15 ||}memorandum of points and authorities in support of their Motion to Strike, both previously 16 || lodged under seal at ECF No. 94. 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 || Dated: October 20, 2022 19 [ Od) (2 re 0 Honorable Todd W. Robinson United States District Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28