Silicon Storage Technology, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, PA et al
Filing
183
ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL. Signed by Judge Lucy Koh on 10/09/2015. (lhklc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/9/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN JOSE DIVISION
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO
FILE UNDER SEAL
Plaintiff,
14
15
Case No. 13-CV-05658-LHK
SILICON STORAGE TECHNOLOGY,
INC.,
v.
16
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE
CO. OF PITTSBURGH, PA, et al.,
17
Defendants.
18
19
“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records
20
and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of
21
Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435
22
U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Thus, when considering a sealing request, “a strong presumption in
23
favor of access is the starting point.” Id.
24
For requests to seal judicial records related to dispositive motions, the parties bear the
25
burden of overcoming the “strong presumption in favor of access” with “compelling reasons
26
supported by specific factual findings” that outweigh the general history of access and the public
27
28
1
Case No. 13-CV-05658-LHK
ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL
1
2
policies favoring disclosure. Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178-79.
For requests to seal judicial records related to nondispositive motions, the parties must
3
meet the lower “good cause” standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Id. at 1179-80.
4
The “good cause” standard requires a “particularized showing” that “specific prejudice or harm
5
will result” if the information is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp.,
6
307 F.3d 1206, 1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). “Broad allegations of harm,
7
unsubstantiated by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus.,
8
Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992).
9
Accordingly, the Court will not grant requests to seal that are overbroad or that include the
sealing of public information contained within public documents. Likewise, the Court will not
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
seal entire documents that contain both sealable and non-sealable information.
12
To facilitate compliance with these rules and the standards established within the Ninth
13
Circuit, the Court hereby establishes the following procedures for filing subsequent administrative
14
motions to file under seal in this case:
15
The parties shall file all administrative motions to file under seal as joint motions. Prior to
16
filing any such joint motions, lead counsel for both parties must meet and confer to decide what
17
information the parties will request to file under seal. The parties must file declarations from lead
18
counsel that confirm compliance with this order with each motion to file under seal.
19
The parties shall file concurrent with the administrative motion to file under seal all
20
necessary declarations establishing that the information sought to be sealed is sealable. For
21
motions to file under seal relating to dispositive motions, the declarations shall set forth the
22
“compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings” that the parties believe outweigh the
23
general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Kamakana, 447 F.3d at
24
1178-79. For motions to file under seal relating to nondispositive motions, the declarations shall
25
set forth the “particularized” reasons that the parties believe that “specific prejudice or harm will
26
result” if the information is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd, 307 F.3d at 1210–11.
27
28
2
Case No. 13-CV-05658-LHK
ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL
1
Except for the four day deadline for filing declarations, the parties shall also comply with all other
2
requirements set forth in Civil Local Rule 79-5(d).
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
5
6
7
Dated: October 9, 2015
______________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge
8
9
10
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
3
Case No. 13-CV-05658-LHK
ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER 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?