Brown v. Google LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHASOM BROWN, et al., Case No. 20-cv-03664-LHK (SVK) Plaintiffs, ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE

MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL v. PORTIONS OF THE JUNE 2, 2021

DISCOVERY HEARING TRANSCRIPT

GOOGLE LLC,

Re: Dkt. No. 194

Defendant.

Now before the Court is the Parties’ joint submission (Dkt. 194), in which Google requests that the Court seal portions of the transcript of the June 2, 2021 discovery hearing. Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 16 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 19 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local Rule 79-5.

1 Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information the parties seek to seal || was submitted to the Court in connection with a discovery-related motion, rather than a motion || that concerns the merits of the case. The Court may reach different conclusions regarding sealing || these documents under different standards or in a different context. Having considered the motions to seal, supporting declarations, and the pleadings on file, and good cause appearing, the || Court ORDERS as follows:

8 Court’s Ruling on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling 9 ealed Seal

June 2, 2021 Discovery Hearing GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect Transcript redacted portions at | confidential technical information 13:2, 13:8-11, regarding Google’s internal 32:18-20, 36:23- systems and operations, including 37:3, 378-11, details related to the various 37:15-20, 37:22-24, «es □ 38:2-5, 46:3-11, types of identifiers/cookies 46:17 Google uses internally and their proprietary functions © SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2021 vo

7 Sussm

QUEM Vine

Z 18 SUSAN VAN KEULEN United States Magistrate Judge