District Court, W.D. Washington, 2020

BioOrigyn LLC v. Fairhaven Health LLC

BioOrigyn LLC v. Fairhaven Health LLC
District Court, W.D. Washington · Decided March 30, 2020
BioOrigyn LLC v. Fairhaven Health LLC

Trial Court Opinion

1 THE HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE BIOORIGYN, LLC, and JOANNA ) ELLINGTON CLIFTON ) ) Case No. 2:20-cv-00285-RAJ 12 Plaintiffs, ) ) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 13 v. ) SEAL ) FAIRHAVEN HEALTH, LLC, ) ) 15 Defendant. ) 16 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion to seal. Dkt. # 2. The motion is unopposed. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion.

18 “There is a strong presumption of public access to the court’s files.” Western District of Washington Local Civil Rule (“LCR”) 5(g). “Only in rare circumstances should a party file a motion, opposition, or reply under seal.” LCR 5(g)(5). Normally the moving party must include “a specific statement of the applicable legal standard and the reasons for keeping a document under seal, with evidentiary support from declarations where necessary.” LCR 5(g)(3)(B).

24 Under LCR 5(g), whichever party designates a document confidential must provide a “specific statement of the applicable legal standard and the reasons for keeping a document under seal, including an explanation of: (i) the legitimate private or public interest that warrant the relief sought; (ii) the injury that will result if the relief sought is not granted; and (iii) why a less restrictive alternative to the relief sought is not sufficient.” LCR 5(g).

4 Here, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have demonstrated compelling reasons to file the identified document under seal. Kamakana v. Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-81 (9th Cir. 2006). The Court has reviewed the document and finds that it contains sensitive proprietary and confidential business information. See Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp., No. 15-cv-1483 JLR, 2018 WL 2124162, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 24, 2018). The Court agrees that the Plaintiffs’ interest in protecting its confidential business information outweighs the right of public access. Douglas v. Xerox Bus. Servs.

11 LLC, No. C12-1798-JCC, 2014 WL 12641056, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 11, 2014).

12 Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion to seal is GRANTED. Dkt. # 2.

14 DATED this the 30th day of March, 2020.

A The Honorable Richard A. Jones 18 United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.