Coupons, Inc. v. Stottlemire

Filing 143

Opposition to Plaintiff Coupons, Inc.'s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal re ( #140 ) filed by John Stottlemire. (Stottlemire, John) (Filed on 2/5/2009) Linkage added on 2/6/2009 (bw, COURT STAFF).

Coupons, Inc. v. Stottlemire

Doc. 143

1 John A. Stottlemire 4509 Wayland Court 2 High Point, NC 27265 Telephone: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Defendant, pro se 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 INTRODUCTION On February 3, 2009, Plaintiff Coupons, Inc. ("CI") filed an administrative motion to file UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION COUPONS, INC., a California corporation, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JOHN STOTTLEMIRE ) ) Defendant ) ) Case No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL Courtroom: 2, 5th Floor Judge: Hon. Howard R. Lloyd

16 under seal portions of the Declaration of Steven Boal in Opposition to Defendant John 17 Stottlemire's ("Stottlemire") Motion to Summarily Enforce the Settlement Agreement. Stottlemire 18 opposes this motion on the grounds that CI has failed to articulate compelling reasons supported 19 by specific factual findings why paragraphs 16-23 of Steven Boal's declaration should be sealed. 20 21 ARGUMENT CI has requested the Court seal statements made by Steven Boal pursuant to Federal Rules

22 of Civil Procedure 26(c). Rule 26(c) applies to materials a party seeks to seal which are a product 23 of discovery and only requires the Court find "good cause" to seal the statements. Because CI has 24 attached the statements it seeks to seal to a dispositive motion, a more elevated standard applies. 25 CI must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the 26 general history of access and public policies favoring disclosure. CI has failed to meet its burden 27 and this Court should deny CI's motion. 28
Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Administrative Motion to File Under Seal No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL

-1-

Dockets.Justia.com

1

CI's request that the above information be filed under seal is made in connection with a

2 dispositive motion. Accordingly, the information may not be filed under seal unless there is a 3 "compelling interest" in doing so. See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Association, 504 F. 3d 792, at 4 801-03 (9th Cir. 2007). A party seeking to seal a judicial record must "articulate compelling 5 reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and 6 public policies favoring disclosure." Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 at 7 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). 8 CI claims four reasons why the statements made by Steven Boal should be sealed: 1)

9 Competitors could use the statements out of context to harm CI, 2) the comments would impact 10 negatively on CI's customers and CI's potential customers, 3) the comments could encourage 11 hackers, and 4) Stottlemire will attempt to use the comments out of context. (See Declaration of 12 Dennis Cusack at ¶ 3, 4). None of these claims are supported by specific factual findings and are 13 simply conclusory statements. 14 In its own motion to seal, CI asks the Court to allow it to file the statements made by

15 Steven Boal "for the foregoing reasons". CI obviously has not asked the Court to find it has 16 compelling reasons that are supported by specific factual findings. Failing to meet its heavy 17 burden by providing compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings, the presumption of 18 access to dispositive pleadings and attachments prevail. CI's motion to file under seal should be 19 denied. 20 21 Dated: February 5, 2009 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Administrative Motion to File Under Seal No. 5:07-CV-03457 HRL

/s/ John Stottlemire Defendant, pro se

-2-