Kosta v. Del Monte Corporation

Filing 202

ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO SEAL by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 121 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 127 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 130 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 144 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 173 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 181 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting 194 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8
9
10

MICHAEL KOSTA AND STEVE BATES,
individuals on their own behalf and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,

11

Plaintiffs,

Case No.:12-cv-1722-YGR
ORDER GRANTING MOTIONS TO SEAL
(Dkt. Nos. 121, 127, 130, 144, 173, 181, 194)

Northern District of California

United States District Court

12

vs.
13
14
15

DEL MONTE FOODS, INC.,
Defendant.

16

Plaintiffs have filed a motion to seal portions of the declaration of Dr. Oral Capps, Jr.
17

submitted in connection with their motion for class certification, at ¶¶ 12, 13, 18, 30, as well as
18

Exhibit C to that declaration. (Dkt. No. 173.) Del Monte’s counsel avers that these documents
19

contain sensitive business information is not publicly available or known to Del Monte’s
20

competitors
21

Defendant has filed a motion to seal (Dkt. No. 181) the following documents submitted in
22

connection with its opposition to the motion for class certification:
23



Exhibits U, V, and W to the Declaration of Liam Farrell in Support of Del Monte

24

Foods, Inc.’s, Opposition to Class Certification, in their entirety;
25



Exhibits 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 to the Declaration of Dr. Keith

26

Ugone in Support of Del Monte Foods, Inc.’s, Opposition to Class Certification in
27

their entirety; and
28



1

Portions of the Declaration of Dr. Keith Ugone in Support of Del Monte Foods,

2

Inc.’s, Opposition to Class Certification at paragraphs 41, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60,

3

62, 63, 64, and 72.

4

Del Monte’s counsel avers that these documents contain highly sensitive and confidential market

5

research, brand strategies, pricing, sales and other proprietary information.

6

Plaintiffs filed a motion to seal certain documents submitted in connection with their reply

7

(Dkt. No. 194), i.e. portions of the Reply Declaration of Dr. Oral Capps, Jr. at ¶¶ 9, 25, 26, 27, 33,

8

and Exhibits A.1, A.2, A.3, and C thereto. Again, these documents are represented by counsel for

9

Del Monte as containing sensitive sales and pricing data not known to Del Monte’s business

10
11

competitors.
Documents submitted in connection with non-dispositive motions may be sealed when good

Northern District of California

United States District Court

12

cause has been shown. Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th

13

Cir.2006). The Court finds that good cause has been shown to seal the documents or portions of

14

documents identified in these motions.

15

The documents are ORDERED SEALED for purposes of consideration of the motions in

16

connection with which they were submitted only. Should any party wish to seal portions of the

17

documents in connection with any later motion or trial, they will need to make a sufficient showing

18

at that time.

19
20
21
22

This Order terminates Docket Nos. 173, 181, and 194, as well as Docket Nos. 121, 127,
130, and 144.1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: February 5, 2015

23

_______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

1

The parties previously filed several motions to seal in connection with briefing on their
previous motion for class certification (and related motions to strike). (Dkt. Nos. 121, 127, 130,
and 144.) By order issued September 4, 2014, the Court denied that motion for class certification
without prejudice to re-filing, and denied the motions to strike as moot in light of the ruling on class
certification. Those motions to seal are terminated as moot. The matters submitted under seal in
those motions shall remain under seal.
2