General Electric Company, et al. v. Wilkins

Filing 460

ORDER GRANTING GE's Request to File Attorney Billing Information Documents Under Seal 459 , signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 7/13/2012. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15

Case No. 1:10-CV-00674 LJO JLT

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

ORDER GRANTING GE’S REQUEST TO
FILE ATTORNEY BILLING
INFORMATION DOCUMENTS UNDER
SEAL

vs.
THOMAS WILKINS,
Defendant.

(Doc. 459)

16
17

Before the Court is the request to seal invoices submitted at the request of the Court for

18

consideration in connection with GE’s motion for sanctions. (Doc. 331, 369) GE contends the

19

document should be sealed because it sets forth the confidential billing rates for the attorneys involved in

20

the motion for sanctions. (Doc. 459-1 at 2) GE contends that if this information was revealed it would

21

impact its competition advantage. Id.

22

Generally, documents filed in civil cases are presumed to be available to the public. EEOC v.

23

Erection Co., 900 F.2d 168, 170 (9th Cir. 1990); see also Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447

24

F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.2006); Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1134 (9th

25

Cir.2003). Documents may be sealed only when the compelling reasons for doing so outweigh the

26

public’s right of access. EEOC at 170. In evaluating the request, the Court considers the “public interest

27

in understanding the judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in improper use

28
1

1

of the material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets.” Valley

2

Broadcasting Co. v. United States District Court, 798 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1986). In addition, in

3

trademark/dress matters, attorney billing rates which are not publicly known and are “competitively

4

sensitive,” warrant sealing. China Intl Travel Servs. (USA) v. China & Asia Travel Serv., 2008 U.S.

5

Dist. LEXIS 106622 at *29 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2008); Mine O'Mine, Inc. v. Calmese, 2012 U.S. Dist.

6

LEXIS 53077 at *10 (D. Nev. Apr. 16, 2012).

7

ORDER

8

Based upon the foregoing, the Court ORDERS:

9

1.

The requested portion of the document will be SEALED.

10

5.

Within two court days, counsel SHALL file a public version of the billing records that is

11

redacted consistent with this order.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

Dated:

15

July 13, 2012

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1
2
DEAC_Signature-END:

3
4

9j7khijed

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1ORDER SEALING DOCUMENTS

Case No. 1:10-CV-00411 LJO JLT