1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTINA KING, No. 2:24-cv-01119-DC-CKD 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO SEAL 14 HARD ROCK CAFE INTERNATIONAL (USA), INC., (Doc. No. 47) 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 10, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of her request to file under seal a recorded 18 video attached as Exhibit 2 to the declaration of Stefan Bogdanovich (Doc. No. 48-1), which was 19 filed in support of Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss the second amended 20 complaint. (Doc. No. 47.) Defendant did not submit any opposition to Plaintiff’s request to seal. 21 For the reasons explained below, the court will grant Plaintiff’s request to file under seal the 22 recorded video attached as Exhibit 2 to the declaration of Stefan Bogdanovich (Doc. No. 48-1). 23 The court recognizes that all documents filed with the court are presumptively public. San 24 Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Court,

, 1103 (9th Cir. 1999) (“It is well- 25 established that the fruits of pretrial discovery are, in the absence of a court order to the contrary, 26 presumptively public.”). However, courts may permit a party to file under seal documents, such 27 briefing in support of (or in opposition to) motions to dismiss and exhibits thereto, where that 28 party shows “compelling reasons” to support maintaining secrecy of those documents. Kamakana 1 v. City & Cty. of Honolulu,

, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006); Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler 2 Grp., LLC,

(9th Cir. 2016) (applying “compelling reasons” standard to 3 motions that are “more than tangentially related to the merits”). “In general, ‘compelling reasons’ 4 sufficient to . . . justify sealing court records exist when such ‘court files might . . . become a 5 vehicle for improper purposes,’ such as the use of records to gratify private spite, promote public 6 scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade secrets.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 7 (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc.,

, 597 & n.7 (1978)). “The mere fact that 8 the production of records may lead to a litigant’s embarrassment, incrimination, or exposure to 9 further litigation will not, without more, compel the court to seal its records.”

10 Here, Plaintiff requests that the recorded video attached as Exhibit 2 to the declaration of 11 Stefan Bogdanovich (Doc. No. 48-1) be filed under seal because it “contains his counsel’s firms 12 credit card information, including the card number and billing information.” (Doc. No. 47 at 2.) 13 Plaintiff “submit[ted] this video because it shows that users can navigate from Defendant Hard 14 Rock Cafe International Inc.’s home page to its hotel page, search for a hotel, pick a particular 15 hotel and type of room, and actually book a hotel stay, without having interacted with the cookie 16 banner.” (Id.) 17 Courts have filed under seal documents “divulging confidential personal and financial 18 information that is unrelated to the public’s understanding of the judicial proceedings.” Tran v. 19 Mayorkas, No. 22-cv-02983-HSG,

, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 25, 2023) (sealing 20 “sensitive recordings” including “credit card numbers”); see also Darisse v. Nest Labs, Inc., No. 21 14-cv-01363-BLF,

, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 2, 2016) (sealing materials 22 containing credit card information). This court likewise finds that Plaintiff has shown compelling 23 reasons exist to grant her request to seal given the sensitive credit card and billing information 24 contained in the recorded video attached as Exhibit 2 to the declaration of Stefan Bogdanovich. 25 Therefore, the court will grant Plaintiff’s request to seal. 26 Accordingly, 27 1. Plaintiff’s request to seal (Doc. No. 47) is GRANTED; 28 2. Exhibit 2 to the declaration of Stefan Bogdanovich filed in support of Plaintiff’s 1 opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss, shall be filed under seal, to be 2 accessed only by the court and the parties; and 3 3. Because Plaintiff has already lodged with the court Exhibit 2 to the declaration of 4 Stefan Bogdanovich, which consists of video files on a thumb drive, (see Doc. No. 5 50, 51), Plaintiff need not provide an additional copy of that exhibit to the court. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. □ g | Dated: _ October 9, 2025 Dena Coggins 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28