DSS Technology Management, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Filing 448

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL.(This order grants docket nos. 321 ; 323 ; 325 ; 327 ; 333 ; 358 ; 360 ; 362 ; 365 ; 366 ; 403 ; 405 ; 222 ; 235 ; 243 ; 257 ; 261 ; 262 ; 267 ; 269 ; 275 ; 303 ; 311 313 and 319 ). (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/26/2020)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8

DSS TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT,
INC.,

Case No. 14-cv-05330-HSG

Plaintiff,

ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTIONS TO SEAL

Defendant.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 222, 235, 243, 257, 261, 262,
267, 269, 275, 303, 311, 313, 319, 321, 323,
325, 327, 333, 358, 360, 362, 365, 366, 403,
405

9
v.
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

APPLE, INC.,

12
Pending before the Court are the parties’ administrative motions to file under seal portions

13
14

of documents in connection with the parties’ motions for (partial) summary judgment, Daubert

15

motions, and motions in limine as well as Apple’s motion for leave to file an amended answer.

16

(twenty-five sealing motions in total). The Court GRANTS the motions to file under seal.

17
18

I.

LEGAL STANDARD
Courts generally apply a “compelling reasons” standard when considering motions to seal

19

documents. Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Kamakana

20

v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)). “This standard derives from the

21

common law right ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records

22

and documents.’” Id. (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178). “[A] strong presumption in favor of

23

access is the starting point.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quotations omitted). To overcome this

24

strong presumption, the party seeking to seal a judicial record attached to a dispositive motion

25

must “articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the

26

general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the public interest in

27

understanding the judicial process” and “significant public events.” Id. at 1178–79 (quotations

28

omitted). “In general, ‘compelling reasons’ sufficient to outweigh the public’s interest in

1

disclosure and justify sealing court records exist when such ‘court files might have become a

2

vehicle for improper purposes,’ such as the use of records to gratify private spite, promote public

3

scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade secrets.” Id. at 1179 (quoting Nixon v.

4

Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)). “The mere fact that the production of records

5

may lead to a litigant’s embarrassment, incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not,

6

without more, compel the court to seal its records.” Id.
Civil Local Rule 79-5 supplements the “compelling reasons” standard. The party seeking

7
8

to file under seal must submit “a request that establishes that the document, or portions thereof, are

9

privileged, protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the law . . . . The
request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material . . . .” Civil L.R. 79-

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

5(b). Courts have found that “confidential business information” in the form of “license

12

agreements, financial terms, details of confidential licensing negotiations, and business strategies”

13

satisfies the “compelling reasons” standard. See In re Qualcomm Litig., No. 3:17-cv-0108-GPC-

14

MDD, 2017 WL 5176922, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017) (observing that sealing such information

15

“prevent[ed] competitors from gaining insight into the parties’ business model and strategy”);

16

Finisar Corp. v. Nistica, Inc., No. 13-cv-03345-BLF (JSC), 2015 WL 3988132, at *5 (N.D. Cal.

17

June 30, 2015).
Records attached to nondispositive motions must meet the lower “good cause” standard of

18
19

Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as such records “are often unrelated, or only

20

tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action.” Id. at 1179–80 (quotations omitted). This

21

requires a “particularized showing” that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the information

22

is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210–11 (9th

23

Cir. 2002); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). “Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated by specific

24

examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 966

25

F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992) (quotation omitted).

26
27
28

II.

DISCUSSION
Because the parties seek to seal portions and documents which pertain to summary

judgment motions, the Court applies the compelling reasons standard. The Court will apply the
2

1

lower good cause standard for documents related to the Daubert motions, motions in limine, and

2

Apple’s motion for leave to file an amended answer.

3

The parties have satisfied the standards for sealing because the unredacted information
contains confidential business and proprietary information relating to the operations of the parties.

5

See Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., No. 11-CV-01846-LHK, 2012 WL 6115623 (N.D.

6

Cal. Dec. 10, 2012); see also Agency Solutions.Com, LLC v. TriZetto Group, Inc., 819 F. Supp. 2d

7

1001, 1017 (E.D. Cal. 2011); Linex Techs., Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., No. C 13-159 CW, 2014

8

WL 6901744 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2014). The parties filed supporting declarations representing that

9

the identified portions of the unredacted versions of motions and exhibits contain information

10

disclosing confidential business information of third parties, licensing information, financial

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

4

information, and non-public technical descriptions of their and third-party products. See, e.g.,

12

Dkt. Nos. 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 300, 345, 349, 355, 356, 389, 390.

13

The Court did not rely on any of the documents that are the subject of the parties’

14

administrative motions to seal. The parties stipulated to an entry of final judgment of

15

noninfringement, which the Court granted. See Dkt. No. 446, 447. Thus, these documents are

16

unrelated to the public’s understanding of the judicial proceedings in this case, and the public’s

17

interest in disclosure of these documents is minimal given that the Court will not rule on the

18

motions. See In re iPhone Application Litig., No. 11-MD-02250-LHK, 2013 WL 12335013, at *2

19

(N.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2013) (“The public’s interest in accessing these documents is even further

20

diminished in light of the fact that the Court will not have occasion to rule on Plaintiffs’ Motion

21

for Class Certification.”). Accordingly, because the documents divulge proprietary and

22

confidential information unrelated to the public’s understanding of the judicial proceedings in this

23

action, the Court finds that there are compelling reasons to file the documents under seal. See

24

Economus v. City & Cty. of San Francisco, No. 18-CV-01071-HSG, 2019 WL 1483804, at *9

25

(N.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2019) (finding compelling reason to seal because the sealing request divulges

26

sensitive information no longer related to the case); In re iPhone, 2013 WL 12335013 (same); Doe

27

v. City of San Diego, No. 12-CV-689-MMA-DHB, 2014 WL 1921742, at *4 (S.D. Cal. May 14,

28

2014) (exhibit’s disclosure of personal information and irrelevance to the matter are compelling
3

1

reasons to seal the exhibit).

2

III.

3

CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS the parties’ administrative motions to file under seal. Pursuant to

4

Civil Local Rule 79-5(f)(1), documents filed under seal as to which the administrative motions are

5

granted will remain under seal.

6
7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 2/26/2020
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4