Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA et al

Filing 131

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL by Judge Paul S. Grewal granting-in-part 80 ; granting 94 ; granting-in-part 109 ; granting-in-part 114 ; granting-in-part 118 ; denying 120 ; denying 123 ; granting-in-part 125 (psglc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/30/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 SILICON STORAGE TECHNOLOGY, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE CO. ) OF PITTSBURGH, PA., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) Case No. 5:13-cv-05658-LHK OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL (Re: Docket Nos. 80, 94, 109, 114, 118, 120, 123, 125) Before the court are eight administrative motions to seal several documents. “Historically, 17 18 courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, 19 including judicial records and documents.’” 1 Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a 20 ‘strong presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” 2 Parties seeking to seal judicial 21 22 records relating to dispositive motions bear the burden of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring 23 24 25 26 disclosure. 3 1 Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n. 7 (1978)). 2 Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). 3 Id. at 1178-79. 27 28 1 Case No. 5:13-cv-05658-LHK OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL However, “while protecting the public's interest in access to the courts, we must remain 1 2 mindful of the parties' right to access those same courts upon terms which will not unduly harm 3 their competitive interest.” 4 Records attached to nondispositive motions therefore are not subject 4 to the strong presumption of access. 5 Because the documents attached to nondispositive motions 5 6 7 8 9 “are often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action,” parties moving to seal must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c). 6 As with dispositive motions, the standard applicable to nondispositive motions requires a “particularized showing” 7 that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the information is disclosed. 8 “Broad allegations of harm, United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 unsubstantiated by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. 9 A protective order 11 sealing the documents during discovery may reflect the court’s previous determination that good 12 cause exists to keep the documents sealed, 10 but a blanket protective order that allows the parties to 13 14 designate confidential documents does not provide sufficient judicial scrutiny to determine whether each particular document should remain sealed. 11 15 In addition to making particularized showings of good cause, parties moving to seal 16 17 documents must comply with the procedures established by Civ. L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to 18 Civ. L.R. 79-5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request that establishes the document 19 4 Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 727 F.3d 1214, 1228-29 (Fed. Cir. 2013). 20 5 See id. at 1180. 21 6 Id. at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted). 22 7 Id. 23 8 24 Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). 9 25 Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992). 10 26 See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80. 11 27 28 See Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A) (“Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are sealable.”). 2 Case No. 5:13-cv-05658-LHK OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL 1 is “sealable,” or “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under 2 the law.” “The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material, and 3 must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).” 12 “Within 4 days of the filing of the Administrative 4 Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration as required by subsection 5 79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable.” 13 6 With these standards in mind, the courts rules on the instant motions as follows: 7 8 9 Motion to Seal Document to be Sealed Result 80 Exhibit B UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit C UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit D UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit E UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit G UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit I UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit K UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California Reason/Explanation 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 12 Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). In part, Civ. L.R. 79-5(d) requires the submitting party to attach a “proposed order that is narrowly tailored to seal only the sealable material” which “lists in table format each document or portion thereof that is sought to be sealed,” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(b), and an “unredacted version of the document” that indicates “by highlighting or other clear method, the portions of the document that have been omitted from the redacted version.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d). 13 28 Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1). 3 Case No. 5:13-cv-05658-LHK OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL business information. 1 2 80 Exhibit L UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit M SEALED. Narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 80 Exhibit N SEALED. Narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 94 Exhibit A SEALED. Narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 94 Exhibit B SEALED. Narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 94 Exhibit C SEALED. Narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 109 Motion to Compel Only designations highlighted in yellow at 7:4-8 at Docket No. 109-5 SEALED; all other designations UNSEALED. Only sealed portions narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 109 Declaration in Support of Motion to Compel UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 109 Exhibit O UNSEALED. Not narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 109 Exhibit P Only designations highlighted in yellow at 14:13-16:11; 47:948:20; 53:22-55:4; 59:14-60:19; 61:18-62:17; 96:10-97:15 at Docket No. 109-6 Exh. P SEALED; all other designations UNSEALED. Only sealed portions narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 114 Motion to Compel Only designations highlighted in yellow at 2:17-18; 5:12-16; 6:13; 7:17-21; 9:3-9; 9:13-14; 10:17-22; 11:10-12 at Docket No. 114-5 SEALED; all other 4 Only sealed portions narrowly tailored to confidential business information. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 5:13-cv-05658-LHK OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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?