Campbell et al v. Facebook Inc.

Filing 110

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal re Joint Letter Brief on Plaintiffs' Third Set of Requests for Production filed by Matthew Campbell, Michael Hurley, David Shadpour. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Melissa Gardner, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Proposed Order, # 5 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Gardner, Melissa) (Filed on 9/18/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008

7
8
9
10
11
12

Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505

13
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class
14
15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
16
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
17
OAKLAND DIVISION

18
19
20

MATTHEW CAMPBELL, MICHAEL
HURLEY, and DAVID SHADPOUR, on
behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,

Case No. C 13-05996 PJH (MEJ)

v.

PLAINTIFFS’ ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
PORTIONS OF JOINT LETTER BRIEF
REGARDING FACEBOOK’S RESPONSES
TO PLAINTIFFS’ THIRD SET OF
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

FACEBOOK, INC.,

Judge:

21
Plaintiffs,
22
23

Honorable Maria-Elena James

24
Defendant.
25
26
27
28
PLAINTIFFS’ ADMIN. MOTION TO SEAL
CASE NO. 13-CV-05996-PJH (MEJ)

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5(c) and (d), Plaintiffs respectfully request an

2

order from the Court authorizing the filing under seal of (1) portions of the parties’ Joint Letter

3

Brief Regarding Facebook’s Responses to Plaintiffs’ Third Set of Requests for Production (the

4

“Joint Letter”).

5

The portions of the Joint Letter that Plaintiffs seek to seal are identified in the redacted

6

version of the Joint Letter, which is attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of Melissa Gardner

7

in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal (“Gardner Declaration”). The unredacted version of the

8

Joint Letter is attached as Exhibit B to the Gardner Declaration, and contains yellow highlighting

9

to indicate where redactions are proposed.

10

Plaintiffs request that the portions of the Joint Letter be filed under seal because they refer

11

to documents or information that Defendant has designated “CONFIDENTIAL” or

12

“CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” under the Amended Stipulated Protective

13

Order (Dkt. No. 93). None of the information at issue in the Joint Letter was designated as

14

confidential by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs take no position on whether the designated portions of the

15

Joint Letter satisfy the requirements for sealing, and specifically reserve the right to challenge any

16

“CONFIDENTIAL” or “CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” designation under

17

the Stipulated Protective Order as well as the sealability of these documents under Civil Local

18

Rule 79-5.

19

Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure grants the Court broad discretion to

20

permit sealing of court documents for, inter alia, the protection of parties from “annoyance,

21

embarrassment, [or] oppression,” as well as the protection of “a trade secret or other confidential

22

research, development, or commercial information.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1). The Ninth Circuit

23

has “carved out an exception to the presumption of access to judicial records for a sealed

24

discovery document [attached] to a nondispositive motion,” where the requesting party shows

25

good cause exists to keep the records under seal. Navarro v. Eskanos & Adler, No. C-06 02231,

26

2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24864, at *6 (N.D. Cal. March 22, 2007) (citing Kamakana v. City &

27

Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006) (“[A] ‘particularized showing’ under the

28

‘good cause’ standard of Rule 26(c) will ‘suffice[] to warrant preserving the secrecy of sealed
-1-

PLAINTIFFS’ ADMIN. MOTION TO SEAL
CASE NO. 13-CV-05996-PJH (MEJ)

1

discovery material attached to nondispositive motions.”); see also Pintos v. Pacific Creditors

2

Assoc., 565 F.3d 1106, 1115 (9th Cir. 2009) (“In light of the weaker public interest in

3

nondispositive materials, we apply the ‘good cause’ standard when parties wish to keep them

4

under seal.”).

5

Defendant must show good cause for sealing the documents they have placed a

6

confidentiality designation upon by submitting a declaration within four days after the lodging of

7

the designated documents. See Civil Local Rule 79-5(e).

8
9
10
Dated: September 18, 2015
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
By:

/s/ Melissa Gardner
Melissa Gardner

Michael W. Sobol (State Bar No. 194857)
[e-mail]
David T. Rudolph (State Bar No. 233457)
[e-mail]
Melissa Gardner (State Bar No. 289096)
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.956.1008
Rachel Geman
[e-mail]
Nicholas Diamand
[e-mail]
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 212.355.9592

24
25
26
27
28
-2-

PLAINTIFFS’ ADMIN. MOTION TO SEAL
CASE NO. 13-CV-05996-PJH (MEJ)

1

6

Hank Bates (State Bar No. 167688)
[e-mail]
Allen Carney
[e-mail]
David Slade
[e-mail]
CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
11311 Arcade Drive
Little Rock, AR 72212
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 501.312.8505

7

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class

2
3
4
5

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

PLAINTIFFS’ ADMIN. MOTION TO SEAL
CASE NO. 13-CV-05996-PJH (MEJ)