Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation v. Acella Pharmaceuticals Incorporated
Filing
248
ORDER granting/denying in part 241 Motion for Leave to File its Unredacted Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law and Accompanying Statement of Material Facts Under Seal. ORDERED denying Motion with regard to Acella's Proposed Unre dacted Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support. The Clerk therefore shall strike the proposed document at docket 242 . ORDERED granting the Motion in all other respects. The Clerk therefore shall file under seal the proposed document lodged at docket 243 . Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 8/31/11.(MAP)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation,
Plaintiff,
10
11
vs.
12
Acella Pharmaceuticals Incorporated,
13
Defendant.
14
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CV 10-1780-PHX-JAT
ORDER
15
16
On August 4, 2011, the Court denied Defendant Acella Pharmaceuticals, LLC’s
17
Motion for Leave to File Its Unredacted Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum
18
of Law and Accompanying Statement of Material Facts Under Seal. (Doc. 236.) The Court
19
ordered the parties to file a stipulation containing compelling reasons for sealing the
20
memorandum in support of Acella’s motion for summary judgment and accompanying
21
statement of material facts and exhibits. On August 9, 2011, Acella filed another Motion for
22
Leave to File its Unredacted Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law and
23
Accompanying Statement of Material Facts Under Seal. (Doc. 241.) The new Motion
24
referenced the stipulation the Court ordered the parties to file, but the parties forgot to file
25
the stipulation. After prompting from the Court (Doc. 244), the parties filed their Stipulation
26
(Doc. 245) on August 19, 2011.
27
The Court starts with a strong presumption in favor of public access to court records.
28
Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003). A party that
1
wants to seal any part of a dispositive motion must overcome this strong presumption with
2
compelling reasons for sealing. Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172,
3
1179 (9th Cir. 2006). To seal any part of non-dispositive motion, a party still must
4
demonstrate good cause. Id. at 1180.
5
After reviewing Acella’s Motion and the parties’ Stipulation, the Court finds that the
6
parties have not demonstrated compelling reasons for filing the Unredacted Motion for
7
Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support under seal. The Court therefore will deny
8
that portion of the Motion to Seal. The Court finds that the parties have met their burden for
9
sealing the Accompanying Statement of Material Facts and requested Exhibits. The Court
10
therefore will grant that portion for the Motion.
11
The Clerk will strike Acella’s Lodged Proposed Unredacted Motion for Summary
12
Judgment and Memorandum of Law (Doc. 242). Pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure
13
5.6(e), Acella shall have five days from the date of this Order to resubmit the stricken Motion
14
for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law for filing into the public record. The
15
Clerk shall file under seal Acella’s Lodged Proposed Unredacted Statement of Material Facts
16
in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment and Exhibits currently lodged at Docket
17
243.
Accordingly,
18
IT IS ORDERED DENYING in part and GRANTING in part Acella’s Motion for
19
Leave to File its Unredacted Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law and
20
Accompanying Statement of Material Facts Under Seal (Doc. 241). It is ordered denying the
21
Motion with regard to Acella’s Proposed Unredacted Motion for Summary Judgment and
22
Memorandum in Support. The Clerk therefore shall strike the proposed document at docket
23
entry 242. It is ordered granting the Motion in all other respects. The Clerk therefore shall
24
file under seal the proposed document lodged at docket entry 243.
25
DATED this 31st day of August, 2011.
26
27
28
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?