B & R Supermarket, Inc., et al v. Visa, Inc. et al

Filing 288

ORDER APPROVING 264 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER SUBJECT TO STATED CONDITIONS.(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 No. C 16-01150 WHA B & R SUPERMARKET, INC.; GROVE LIQUORS, LLC, 11 Plaintiffs, For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 v. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 VISA, INC.; VISA USA, INC.; MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL, INC.; AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY; DISCOVER FINANCIAL SERVICES; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE; CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION; CHASE BANK USA, N.A.; CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA), N.A.; CITIBANK, N.A.; PNC BANK, N.A.; USAA SAVINGS BANK; U.S. BANCORP, N.A.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; EMVCo, LLC; JCB CO., LTD; and UNIONPAY, a Chinese bank association, ORDER APPROVING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER SUBJECT TO STATED CONDITIONS 20 Defendants. / 21 22 The stipulated protective order submitted by the parties is hereby APPROVED, subject to 23 the following conditions, including adherence to the Ninth Circuit’s strict caution against 24 sealing orders (as set out below): 25 1. The parties must make a good-faith determination that any 26 information designated “confidential” truly warrants protection under Rule 26(c) 27 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Designations of material as 28 “confidential” must be narrowly tailored to include only material for which there 1 is good cause. A pattern of over-designation may lead to an order un-designating 2 all or most materials on a wholesale basis. 3 2. In order to be treated as confidential, any materials filed with the 4 Court must be lodged with a request for filing under seal in compliance with Civil 5 Local Rule 79-5. Please limit your requests for sealing to only those narrowly 6 tailored portions of materials for which good cause to seal exists. Please include 7 all other portions of your materials in the public file and clearly indicate therein 8 where material has been redacted and sealed. Each filing requires an 9 individualized sealing order; blanket prospective authorizations are no longer 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 allowed by Civil Local Rule 79-5. 3. Chambers copies should include all material — both redacted and 12 unredacted — so that chambers staff does not have to reassemble the whole brief 13 or declaration. Although chambers copies should clearly designate which 14 portions are confidential, chambers copies with confidential materials will be 15 handled like all other chambers copies of materials without special restriction, and 16 will typically be recycled, not shredded. 17 4. In Kamakana v. Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006), 18 the Ninth Circuit held that more than good cause, indeed, “compelling reasons” 19 are required to seal documents used in dispositive motions, just as compelling 20 reasons would be needed to justify a closure of a courtroom during trial. 21 Otherwise, the Ninth Circuit held, public access to the work of the courts will be 22 unduly compromised. Therefore, no request for a sealing order will be allowed 23 on summary judgment motions (or other dispositive motions) unless the movant 24 first shows a “compelling reason,” a substantially higher standard than “good 25 cause.” This will be true regardless of any stipulation by the parties. Counsel are 26 warned that most summary judgment motions and supporting material should be 27 completely open to public view. Only social security numbers, names of 28 juveniles, home addresses and phone numbers, and trade secrets of a compelling 2 1 nature (like the recipe for Coca Cola, for example) will qualify. If the courtroom 2 would not be closed for the information, nor should any summary judgment 3 proceedings, which are, in effect, a substitute for trial. Motions in limine are also 4 part of the trial and must likewise be laid bare absent compelling reasons. Please 5 comply fully. Noncompliant submissions are liable to be stricken in 6 their entirety. 7 8 9 5. Any confidential materials used openly in court hearings or trial will not be treated in any special manner absent a further order. 6. This order does not preclude any party from moving to undesignate information or documents that have been designated as confidential. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 The party seeking to designate material as confidential has the burden of 12 establishing that the material is entitled to protection. 13 7. The Court will retain jurisdiction over disputes arising from the 14 proposed and stipulated protective order for only NINETY DAYS after final 15 termination of the action. 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 20 Dated: June 30, 2016. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?