UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Ascente Business Consulting, LLC d/b/a Case No. 0:18-cv-00138-JNE-KMM LibertyID, Plaintiff, v. ORDER DR myCommerce, Inc. d/b/a ESellerate; Digital River, Inc., Defendants.

On March 16, 2020, the parties jointly filed a letter in response to this Court’s March 9, 2020 Order regarding two Joint Motions Regarding Continued Sealing filed pursuant to District of Minnesota Local Rule 5.6. (Letter, ECF No. 137; Order, ECF No. 136; First Joint Mot., ECF No. 132; Second Joint Mot., ECF No. 133.) The parties have abandoned their requests for continued sealing of the documents at the following docket entries: 106, 123-5, 123-7, and 123- 8. Based on the parties’ agreement, the Court concludes that these docket entries should be unsealed.

The parties’ letter also provides additional justification for the request to keep the documents at the following docket entries under seal: 99, 100, 102, 104, 123, 123-1, 123-2, 123- 3, 123-4, and 130. The Court also notes that it previously observed that the document at docket entry 123-6 should remain sealed. (ECF No. 136 at 2 n.1.) Having reviewed the documents at issue, and in light of the governing standards for sealing of documents filed with the Court, IDT Corp. v. eBay, 709 F.3d 1220, 1222–24 (8th Cir. 2013), the Court concludes that the parties have shown that these materials meet the standards for continued sealing of judicial records.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The Joint Motions Regarding Continued Sealing (ECF Nos. 132, 133) are GRANTED as modified by the parties’ joint letter.

2. The Clerk’s Office is directed to unseal the documents at the following docket entries: 106, 123-5, 123-7, and 123-8.

3. The Clerk’s Office is directed to keep the documents at the following docket entries under seal: 99, 100, 102, 104, 123, 123-1, 123-2, 123-3, 123-4, and 130.

Date: April 1, 2020 s/Katherine Menendez Katherine Menendez United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Ascente Business Consulting, LLC d/b/a Case No. 0:18-cv-00138-JNE-KMM LibertyID, Plaintiff, v. ORDER DR myCommerce, Inc. d/b/a ESellerate; Digital River, Inc., Defendants.

On March 16, 2020, the parties jointly filed a letter in response to this Court’s March 9, 2020 Order regarding two Joint Motions Regarding Continued Sealing filed pursuant to District of Minnesota Local Rule 5.6. (Letter, ECF No. 137; Order, ECF No. 136; First Joint Mot., ECF No. 132; Second Joint Mot., ECF No. 133.) The parties have abandoned their requests for continued sealing of the documents at the following docket entries: 106, 123-5, 123-7, and 123- 8. Based on the parties’ agreement, the Court concludes that these docket entries should be unsealed.

The parties’ letter also provides additional justification for the request to keep the documents at the following docket entries under seal: 99, 100, 102, 104, 123, 123-1, 123-2, 123- 3, 123-4, and 130. The Court also notes that it previously observed that the document at docket entry 123-6 should remain sealed. (ECF No. 136 at 2 n.1.) Having reviewed the documents at issue, and in light of the governing standards for sealing of documents filed with the Court, IDT Corp. v. eBay, 709 F.3d 1220, 1222–24 (8th Cir. 2013), the Court concludes that the parties have shown that these materials meet the standards for continued sealing of judicial records.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The Joint Motions Regarding Continued Sealing (ECF Nos. 132, 133) are GRANTED as modified by the parties’ joint letter.

2. The Clerk’s Office is directed to unseal the documents at the following docket entries: 106, 123-5, 123-7, and 123-8.

3. The Clerk’s Office is directed to keep the documents at the following docket entries under seal: 99, 100, 102, 104, 123, 123-1, 123-2, 123-3, 123-4, and 130.

Date: April 1, 2020 s/Katherine Menendez Katherine Menendez United States Magistrate Judge