Circle Click Media LLC v. Regus Management Group LLC et al

Filing 209

ORDER by Judge Samuel Conti granting in part and denying in part 187 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 CIRCLE CLICK MEDIA LLC; METRO ) Case No. 12-cv-04000-SC TALENT, LLC; and CTNY INSURANCE ) GROUP LLC, ) ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND ) DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' Plaintiffs, ) ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE ) UNDER SEAL v. ) ) ) REGUS MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC, et ) al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) 17 18 Now before the Court is Plaintiffs Circle Click Media LLC and 19 CTNY Insurance Group, LLC's (collectively "Plaintiffs") 20 administrative motion to file under seal. 21 identify several documents and some information designated as 22 confidential by Defendants, including: (1) portions of Plaintiffs' 23 opposition brief to Defendant Regus plc's renewed motion to 24 dismiss; (2) portions of a stipulation regarding Defendants' 25 revenues; (3) portions of exhibits 4, 5, 6, and 9 to the 26 declaration of Joseph A. Garofolo; and (4) exhibits A, B, and C to 27 the declaration of Anne A. Ward. 28 ECF No. 187. Defendants have submitted two documents in response. Plaintiffs See ECF Osburn, the treasurer of Regus Corporation, declares that certain 3 portions of the stipulation and opposition brief contain sensitive 4 financial information that Regus employees are required to keep 5 confidential. 6 statements to be a valid basis for sealing that information. 7 Plaintiffs' motion is GRANTED with respect to the stipulation and 8 United States District Court Nos. 193 ("Blazewicz Decl."); 194 ("Osburn Decl."). 2 For the Northern District of California 1 the redacted portions of their opposition on page 10, lines 23-25, 9 and page 11, line 1. Osburn Decl. ¶ 2. Michael The Court finds Mr. Osburn's However, the other redacted portions of 10 Plaintiffs' opposition brief refer to documents that Defendants 11 have determined need not be sealed. 12 therefore DENIED with respect to the redactions on page 8 of their 13 opposition brief. Plaintiffs' motion is Defendants have determined that Exhibits 4, 5, 6, and 9 to the 14 15 Garofolo declaration do not need to be sealed. 16 3-6. 17 exhibits. 18 Blazewicz Decl. ¶¶ Plaintiffs' motion is therefore DENIED with respect to those Defendants assert that exhibits A, B, and C to the Ward 19 Declaration contain email correspondence produced and designated as 20 confidential by Plaintiffs. 21 documents need to be sealed. 22 under the impression that Defendants have designated the emails as 23 confidential. 24 Therefore, neither party considers these emails confidential, and 25 neither party's filings include any basis for sealing them. 26 Plaintiffs' motion is DENIED with respect to exhibits A, B, and C 27 to the Ward declaration. 28 Defendants do not believe that those Id. ¶ 7. Plaintiffs, however, are See ECF No. 187-1 ("Garofolo Decl.") ¶ 3(vii)-(vix). In accordance with Civil Local Rule 79(f), Plaintiffs shall 2 1 file revised versions of their motion and supporting documents as 2 specified below, within seven (7) days of the signature date of 3 this order: 4 • Exhibits 4, 5, 6, and 9 to the Garofolo Declaration (ECF Nos. 5 187-7, 187-8, 187-9, 187-10) shall be filed in the public 6 record with no redactions. 7 • Exhibits A, B, and C to the Ward Declaration (ECF Nos. 187-11, United States District Court For the Northern District of California 8 187-12, 187-13) shall be filed in the public record with no 9 redactions. 10 • Plaintiffs' opposition brief (ECF Nos. 187-3, 187-4) shall be 11 filed with no redactions on page 8, but with the redactions on 12 page 10 and 11 as in the original. 13 14 • The stipulation regarding Regus' Revenue (ECF No. 187-5) may remain as originally filed. 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 18 Dated: August 14, 2014 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?