A Place For Mom Inc v. Perkins

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE A PLACE FOR MOM, INC., a Delaware CASE NO. C20-1028-JCC corporation, MINUTE ORDER 11 Plaintiff, v. LISA PERKINS, an individual, Defendant.

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C.

Coughenour, United States District Judge: This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ stipulated motion to seal (Dkt. No. 62). The parties move to to maintain under seal the confidential list of referral sources attached as Exhibit A to the parties’ Stipulation for a Permanent Injunction. (Id.) “There is a strong presumption of public access to the court’s files.” W.D. Wash. Local Civ. R. 5(g). This presumption applies particularly to “dispositive pleadings,” which includes exhibits attached to such pleadings. Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006).

To overcome this presumption, there must be a “compelling reason” for sealing that is “sufficient to outweigh the public’s interest in disclosure.” Id.; see Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLP, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101–03 (9th Cir. 2016). “[T]he ‘compelling reasons’ standard does not require the court to find an infringement of trade secrets if the material at issue is disclosed.

2 Rather, it only requires that disclosure ‘might become a vehicle for improper purposes,’ including the ‘release of trade secrets.’” PTP OneClick, LLC v. Avalara, Inc., Case No. C19- 0640-JLR, Dkt. No. 87 at 8 (W.D. Wash. 2019) (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179)). Here, the exhibit at issue contains Plaintiff’s purported trade secrets, the disclosure of which could cause Plaintiff substantial economic and competitive harm. (See Dkt. No. 15 at 2; Dkt. No. 18 at 4.) Thus, maintaining the exhibit under seal is necessary to prevent the Court’s files from being used for an improper purpose and to avoid irreparable harm to Plaintiff. See PTP OneClick, LLC, Case No. C19-0640-JLR, Dkt. No. 87 at 8. Accordingly, the Court finds compelling reasons to maintain the exhibits under seal, GRANTS the parties’ motion (Dkt. No. 62), and DIRECTS the Clerk to maintain Docket Number 63 under seal.

12 DATED this 25th day of August 2021.

Ravi Subramanian Clerk of Court s/Sandra Rawski Deputy Clerk