Starbucks Corporation v. Amcor Packaging Distribution, et al.,
ORDER re cross-defendant Ozburn-Hesse Logistic's 31 Request to Seal Document signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 10/8/2014. Within 10 days from date of Order, OHL shall specifically identify provisions in the Agreement which asserts constituted "sensitive business information" and explain why that information is sensitive and should be sealed or redacted from the public record. (Marciel, M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
STARBUCKS CORPORATION, a
CIV. No. 2:13-1754 WBS CKD
ORDER RE: OZBURN-HESSEY
LOGISTIC’S REQUEST TO SEAL
AMCOR PACKAGING DISTRIBUTION,
a corporation; AMCOR
PACKAGING (USA), INC., a
corporation; and PALLETS
UNLIMINTED, LLC, a limited
Cross-defendant Ozburn-Hessey Logistics (“OHL”) has
submitted a Request to Seal Exhibit 5 to its Request for Judicial
Notice in Support of its Motion to Dismiss Pallets Unlimited,
be an agreement between OHL and plaintiff Starbucks.
states the document contains sensitive business information that
is subject to a confidentiality agreement between those two
(Docket No. 31.)
Exhibit 5 purports to
A party seeking to seal a judicial record bears the
burden of overcoming a strong presumption in favor of public
1178 (9th Cir. 2006).
reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the
general history of access and the public policies favoring
disclosure, such as the public interest in understanding the
Id. at 1178-79 (internal quotation marks and
In ruling on a motion to seal, the court must
balance the competing interests of the public and the party
seeking to keep records secret.
Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172,
The party must “articulate compelling
Id at 1179.
A private confidentiality agreement does not per se
constitute a compelling reason to seal a document that outweighs a
interests of public disclosure and access.
the sensitive information, nor has it indicated to the court why
the information is sensitive or pointed out where in the agreement
that information is contained.
cannot find a compelling reason to seal the document.
OHL has not identified
Absent any guidance, the court
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that within 10 days from the
date of this Order, OHL shall specifically identify the provisions
in the agreement which asserts constituted “sensitive business
information” and explain why that information is sensitive and
should be sealed or redacted from the public record.
October 8, 2014
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?