Adobe Systems Incorporated v. Kornrumpf

Filing 225

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken GRANTING DEFENDANTS 216 MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/11/2012)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, 5 6 7 8 Plaintiff, United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL (Docket No. 216) v. HOOPS ENTERPRISE LLC; and ANTHONY KORNRUMPF, Defendants. 9 10 No. C 10-2769 CW ________________________________/ AND ALL RELATED CLAIMS ________________________________/ Defendants Hoops Enterprise LLC and Anthony Kornrumpf seek 13 leave to seal portions of their supplemental brief in opposition 14 to the motion for partial summary judgment filed by Plaintiff 15 Adobe Systems Inc., portions of the supplemental Kornrumpf and 16 Boyce declarations and Exhibit D to the Boyce Declaration, and the 17 entirety of Exhibit E to the Boyce declaration. 18 already filed a redacted version of their supplemental brief, the 19 Kornrumpf and Boyce declarations and Exhibit D in the public 20 record. 21 Defendants have Docket No. 215. Defendants’ filings are connected to a dispositive motion. 22 To establish that the documents are sealable, they “must overcome 23 a strong presumption of access by showing that ‘compelling reasons 24 supported by specific factual findings . . . outweigh the general 25 history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure.’” 26 Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 679 (9th Cir. 2010) 27 (citation omitted). 28 This cannot be established simply by showing 1 that the documents are subject to a protective order or by stating 2 in general terms that the material is considered to be 3 confidential, but rather must be supported by a sworn declaration 4 demonstrating with particularity the need to file each document 5 under seal. 6 Civil Local Rule 79-5(a). The Court has previously granted leave to file under seal a 7 settlement agreement, which the parties had executed to settle 8 prior litigation between them and had agreed to keep confidential 9 as part of the terms of settlement, and other documents that United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 excerpted or referenced the terms of that settlement agreement. 11 See, e.g., Docket Nos. 150, 193, 201, 210. 12 that Exhibit E contains a copy of the settlement agreement, and 13 that the portions of the other documents that they seek to seal, 14 including the supplemental brief, Boyce and Kornrumpf declarations 15 and Exhibit D, contain excerpts and references to the terms of 16 that settlement agreement. 17 these documents, the Court finds that Defendants have established 18 that they are sealable. 19 Defendants represent Boyce Decl. ¶¶ 5-8. Having reviewed For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ 20 motion to file under seal (Docket No. 216). 21 the date of this Order, Defendants shall file under seal their 22 unredacted supplemental brief, the Boyce and Kornrumpf 23 declarations and Exhibits D and E to the Boyce declaration. 24 Within four days of IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 27 Dated: 6/11/2012 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 28 2

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?