Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. v. Light & Wonder, Inc.

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA Aristocrat Technologies, Inc., et al., 2 : 2 4 -cv-00382-GMN-MDC Plaintiff(s), ORDER TO FILE A STIPULATION vs. Light & Wonder, Inc., et al., 8 Defendant(s).

10 The undersigned is considering plaintiffs’ Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. and Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd.’s Motion for Leave to File Under Seal Portions of Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for the Issuance of a Letter of Request For International Judicial Assistance Pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence (“Motion”). ECF No. 179. The Court notes that the District Judge recently ruled on multiple motions to seal, denying sealing for some groups of information and granting sealing for others, using the compelling reasons standard. See ECF No. 190, citing to Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006).

17 At least some of the information that the plaintiff’s move to seal in the instant Motion is duplicative or relates to groups of documents that the Court has ruled on under the higher compelling reasons standard. Since this is a discovery issue, the lower “good cause” standard applies in this instance to seal the information in question. Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 2006). Given that the District Judge denied sealing for some groups of information, the Court also recognizes that some of the issues raised in the instant Motion might be moot, as some information is now part of the public record.

24 It would be helpful to the Court if the parties met and conferred, in light of the District Judge’s Order (ECF No. 190), and filed a stipulation that outlines, as it pertains to the instant Motion only: (1) exactly what documents and information the parties’ believe should still be filed under seal under the good cause standard despite the District Judge’s Order and (2) what documents and information can now be unsealed per the District Judge’s Order. The Court defers ruling on the Motion until after the parties file the Stipulation.

6 IT IS ORDERED THAT the parties have until February 6, 2025 to file a stipulation pursuant to this Order.

8 Date: January 23, 2025. _________________________ 11 Hon. Maximiliano D. Couvillier III United States Magistrate Judge