Sparta Consulting, Inc. v. Copart, Inc.

Filing 247

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 3/2/17 GRANTING Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Copart, Inc.'s Request to seal certain exhibits submitted in support of Copart Inc.'s opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

Case No: 2:14-CV-00046-KJM-CKD

COPART, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.

13
14
15
16

SPARTA CONSULTING, INC., KPIT
INFOSYSTEMS, INC., and KPIT
TECHNOLOGIES, LTD.,
Defendants.
_______________________________________

ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF/COUNTERDEFENDANT
COPART, INC.’S REQUEST TO SEAL
CERTAIN EXHIBITS SUBMITTED IN
SUPPORT OF COPART INC.’S
OPPOSITIONS TO DEFENDANTS’
MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
L.R. 140, 141

SPARTA CONSULTING, INC.,
18
Counterplaintiff,

19
20

February 24, 2017
10 a.m.
Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller
Courtroom 3, 15th Floor

August 14, 2017

v.

21

Hearing Date:
Time:
Judge:
Location:

Trial Date:

17

COPART, INC.,

22

Counterdefendant.

23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER
Case No. 2:14-cv-00046-KJM-CKD

1

Having considered Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Copart, Inc.’s Request to Seal Portions of

2

Certain Exhibits Submitted in Support of Copart’s Oppositions to Defendants’ Motions for

3

Summary Judgment, and the papers filed in relation thereto, and finding compelling reasons

4

therefor:

5

Copart’s request to seal is HEREBY GRANTED as explained below.

6

The court finds that portions of Exhibits 93, 94, 95, and 96 of the Takenouchi declaration

7

submitted in support of Copart’s request to seal contain detailed technical specifications and

8

designs for the Copart imaging technology and credit card processing functionality that forms the

9

basis of Copart’s trade secrets claims in this action. Preventing disclosure of trade secret and other

10

commercially sensitive information is a “compelling reason” justifying the sealing of documents.

11

Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006); Serv. Employees

12

Int’l Union v. Prime Healthcare Servs., Inc., No. CIV. S-08-2980-LKK-CMK, 2010 WL 2843942,

13

at *6 (E.D. Cal. July 19, 2010). Copart has demonstrated that it is likely to suffer competitive

14

harm if this information is publicly disclosed. Copart’s request to seal is narrowly tailored to seal

15

only the information that discloses Copart’s claimed trade secrets and commercially sensitive

16

information.

17
18
19

Therefore, the court orders approves Copart’s request to seal the information identified in
Exhibits 93, 94, 95, and 96 of the Takenouchi declaration, respectively.
This order does not predetermine sealing for the purposes of trial. In addition, the court

20

may revisit this order if it determines certain information should be disclosed to properly resolve

21

the motions for summary judgment in a public order.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: March 2, 2017

24
25
26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28
ORDER
Case No. 2:14-cv-00046-KJM-CKD