UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE ALPHABET, INC., SHAREHOLDER Case No. 21-cv-09388-RFL DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SEALING Re: Dkt. No. 85

On May 30, 2025, Plaintiffs filed an administrative motion to consider whether another party’s materials should be sealed. (Dkt. No. 85.) Certain paragraphs in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) and the associated redline were redacted because they contained information that Alphabet, Inc. asked Plaintiffs to treat as confidential. (Id.) On June 6, 2025, Alphabet filed a joinder in support of Plaintiffs’ administrative motion. (Dkt. No. 88.) However, Alphabet has not provided “compelling reasons” to keep the relevant paragraphs under seal, especially given their centrality to the “merits of [the] case.” See Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC,

, 1096–99 (9th Cir. 2016). Therefore, Alphabet is ordered to show cause, in writing, by July 7, 2025 why the paragraphs should not be unsealed. Specifically, Alphabet should address the following questions: 1. Alphabet supports the request to seal several paragraphs in the FAC by asserting, among other reasons, that certain paragraphs contain “confidential and sensitive business information,” and “information about highly sensitive ongoing regulatory matters.” (Dkt. No. 88-1 ¶¶ 8–9.) Given that the events described occurred five or more years ago, why does Alphabet still have a “compelling reason” to seal this information? 2. Alphabet also asserts that several paragraphs should be sealed because they relate to confidential board deliberations. Why would the public disclosure of general descriptions of board briefings and votes, which do not single out individual board members, have a “chilling effect on internal company deliberations”? (Dkt. No. 88 at 4.)

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 2, 2025

RITA F. LIN United States District Judge