Calhoun v. Google LLC

4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PATRICK CALHOUN, et al., Case No. 20-cv-05146-LHK (SVK) 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE 9 v. MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL 10 GOOGLE LLC, Re: Dkt. Nos. 399, 401, 409 11 Defendant.

12 Before the Court are several administrative motions to file under seal materials associated with discovery disputes in this case. Dkt. 399, 401, 409; see also Dkt. 407, 408.

14 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 discovery-related motions, 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: 7 1. Dkt. 399 Court’s Ruling 9 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling Sealed Seal 10 Joint Submission in Response to Dkt. GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect confidential Re: Status of Discovery Disputes – redacted portions at: technical information regarding 11 Second Topic sensitive features of Google’s internal 12 2:21-22; 2:24-25; systems and operations, including 3:1-4; 3:10-12; details related to Google’s projects, data 13 4:11-12 logs and their proprietary functions, that Google maintains as confidential in the 14 ordinary course of its business and is not generally known to the public or 15 Google’s competitors.

Exhibit A to Joint Discovery Brief GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect confidential 16 redacted portions at: technical information regarding 1-2, 5-6, 8 sensitive features of Google’s internal 17 systems and operations, including details related to Google’s projects, data 18 logs, internal identifiers/cookies and their proprietary functions, that Google 19 maintains as confidential in the ordinary course of its business and is not 20 generally known to the public or Google’s competitors.

2. Dkt. 401 23 Court’s Ruling Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling 24 Sealed Seal Joint Submission in Response to Dkt. GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect 25 397 Re: ESI Custodians redacted portions at: confidential information regarding 26 Google’s internal strategies, system 2:7; 2:8-9; 2:10-12; designs, and business practices for 27 2:15-17; 2:18-19; operating and maintaining many of 2:22-23; 3:1-2 its services and products, 1 onfidential information could affect Google’s competitive standing as 2 ompetitors may alter their identifier system designs and practices relating 3 o competing products. It may also lace Google at an increased risk of 4 yber security threats, as third arties may seek to use the 5 . . . , information to compromise Google’s 6 identifier systems.

7 3. Dkt. 409 8 Court’s Ruling 9 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling Sealed Seal 10 December 13, 2021 Joint Submission | GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect portions highlighted {confidential information that Google 11 in yellow at: maintains as confidential in the ordinary course of its business and is 12 3:11-12; 3:19-21; Inot generally known to the public or 413 5:26-28; 6:28 Google’s competitors. = Appendix A GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect v 14 portions highlighted {confidential information that Google © in yellow at: maintains as confidential in the 15 ordinary course of its business and is 2 7:9; 7:10; 7:12 Inot generally known to the public or 16 Google’s competitors & ~ SO ORDERED. a 18 Dated: January 6, 2022 20 Suse yar Kul 7 21 SUSAN VAN KEULEN United States Magistrate Judge