Hohenberg v. Ferrero USA, Inc

Filing 65

ORDER granting 57 Motion to File Documents Under Seal. Signed by Judge Marilyn L. Huff on 8/17/2011. (leh)(jrd)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 In re FERRERO LITIGATION CASE NO. 11-CV-205 H (CAB) ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE APPLICATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 On August 15, 2011, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte application for an order allowing them to file documents under seal. (Doc. No. 57.) Plaintiffs seek to seal the unredacted memorandum in support of Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, Exhibits 1-4, 10, 13-17, 20, 22, 24-26, and 28-34 to the Declaration of Gregory S. Weston, as well as the unredacted ex parte application to seal documents. “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cnty of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Except for documents that are traditionally kept secret, there is “a strong presumption in favor of access to court records.” Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178-79. “A party seeking to seal a judicial record then bears the burden of overcoming this strong presumption by meeting the compelling reasons standard. That is, the party must articulate 28 -1- 11cv205 1 compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings, ... that outweigh the general history 2 of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the public interest in 3 understanding the judicial process.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178-79 (citations and quotation 4 marks omitted). The presumed right to access to court proceedings and documents can be 5 overcome “only by an overriding right or interest ‘based on findings that closure is essential 6 to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that interest.’” Oregonian Publ’g 7 Co. v. United States Dist. Court, 920 F.2d 1462, 1465 (9th Cir.1990) (quoting Press-Enterprise 8 Co. v. Superior Court, 446 U.S. 501, 510 (1985)). 9 The Court concludes that good cause exists to seal the requested documents. 10 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ ex parte application to file documents in support 11 of their motion for class certification under seal. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 DATED: August 17, 2011 14 ______________________________ 15 MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 11cv205