Lalo v. Apple, Inc et al

Filing 215

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh in case 5:10-cv-05881-LHK; finding as moot (126) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (145) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (156) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (176) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (187) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (189) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (190) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; finding as moot (191) Administrative Motion to File Under Seal in case 5:11-md-02250-LHK (lhklc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/8/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

12
13

IN RE IPHONE APPLICATION LITIG.

14
15
16

Case No.: 11-MD-02250-LHK
ORDER DENYING SEALING
MOTIONS

Before the Court are numerous administrative motions to seal related to Plaintiffs’ Motion

17
18

for Class Certification and the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Apple Inc.

19

(“Apple”). Specifically, the parties seek to seal documents and portions of documents related to:

20

(1) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and the exhibits attached in support thereof, see ECF

21

Nos. 126, 189; Apple’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, see ECF Nos. 145,

22

187; (3) Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Class Certification, see ECF Nos. 176, 190; and (4)

23

Plaintiffs’ Opposition Apple’s Motion for Summary Judgment, see ECF Nos. 156, 191.1
On March 7, 2013, after learning about Apple’s failure to timely comply with its discovery

24
25

obligations, the Court denied Apple’s Motion for Summary Judgment and instructed Plaintiffs to

26
27
28

1

On February 15, 2013, the Court ordered the parties to re-file their administrative motions to seal
in compliance with the Court’s Civil Standing Order Regarding Motions to File Under Seal. See
ECF No. 181.
1
Case No.: 11-MD-02250-LHK
ORDER DENYING SEALING MOTIONS

1

withdraw their Motion for Class Certification, see ECF No. 209, which Plaintiffs did on March 8,

2

2013, see ECF No. 210.

3

Given Plaintiffs’ withdrawal of their Motion for Class Certification, the Court DENIES as

4

moot the parties’ administrative motions to file under seal documents and portions of documents

5

related to: (1) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification and the exhibits attached in support thereof,

6

ECF Nos. 126, 189; (2) Apple’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification, ECF Nos.

7

145, 187; and (3) Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Class Certification, ECF Nos. 176, 190. In

8

addition, the Court DENIES as moot the parties’ request to seal Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Apple’s

9

Motion for Summary Judgment and certain exhibits and declarations filed in support thereto, ECF

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Nos. 156, 191.

11

When Apple is permitted to file another motion for summary judgment in the future, any

12

motion to seal related to this motion must set forth “compelling reasons,” rather than mere “good

13

cause,” for filing such information under seal. See Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447

14

F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir. 2006) (explaining that the “strong presumption of access to judicial

15

records applies fully to dispositive pleadings, including motions for summary judgment and related

16

attachments” because “the resolution of a dispute on the merits, whether by trial or summary

17

judgment, is at the heart of the interest in ensuring the “public’s understanding of the judicial

18

process and of significant public events.”); cf. Decl. Leslie Fithian on Behalf of Apple Inc. In Supp.

19

Admin. Mot. to File under Seal Portions of Pls.’ Opp’n to Apple Inc.’s Mot. for Summ. J. Pursuant,

20

ECF No. 169 (setting forth only “good cause” to maintain certain documents under seal).

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23

Dated: April 8, 2013

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 11-MD-02250-LHK
ORDER DENYING SEALING MOTIONS