City of Birmingham Relief and Retirement System v. Guthart et al

Filing 7

ORDER DENYING SEALING MOTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, to refiling the request with an appropriate, narrowly-tailored declaration. 1 . Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on 3/31/2014. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2014) Modified on 3/31/2014 (cv, COURT STAFF).

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

CITY OF BIRMINGHAM RELIEF &
RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Inividually and
Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant
INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC.,
Plaintiff,

14
15

v.
GARY S. GUTHART, et al.,

16

Defendants.

17

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:14-cv-01307-PSG
ORDER DENYING
SEALING MOTION WITHOUT
PREJUDICE
(Re: Docket No. 1)

Before the court is an administrative motion to file portions of the complaint and a motion

18
19

for consolidation and for appointment of lead plaintiff and lead counsel under seal. Those

20

documents allegedly refer to internal business records, internal practices, board meeting minutes,

21

presentations and underlying litigation. The parties have not submitted a narrowly-tailored

22
23

declaration pointing out with particularity why sealing is warranted and the request itself is
overbroad. 1 Instead, the parties appear to believe sealing is warranted based on a stipulation

24
25
26
27
28

1

See Civil L.R. 79-5(b) (“A sealing order may issue only upon a request that establishes that the
document, or portions thereof, are privileged, protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to
protection under the law. The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable
material, and must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).”) (parenthetical omitted); Pecover v. Elec.
Arts, Inc., Case No. 4:08-cv-2820-CW, 2013 WL 174063, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2013)
(To overcome the “strong presumption of access” and “the public policies favoring” disclosure,
parties must do more than simply “showing that the document is subject to a protective order or by
1
Case No. 5:14-cv-01307-PSG
ORDER DENYING SEALING MOTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE