Robert Heath v. Google Inc.

Filing 382

ORDER GRANTING 378 GOOGLE LLCS UNOPPOSED MOTION TO REDACT. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 9/26/2018.(blflc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2018)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 ROBERT HEATH, ET AL., Plaintiffs, 8 v. 9 10 GOOGLE LLC, ORDER GRANTING GOOGLE LLC’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO REDACT [RE: ECF 378] Defendant. 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 15-cv-01824-BLF 12 On September 21, 2018, Defendant Google LLC (“Google”) filed an Unopposed 13 14 Administrative Motion to Redact Portions of the Court’s Order Denying Defendant Google LLC’s 15 Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Motion to Decertify 16 Collection Action (“Order”) (ECF 367) pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11. See ECF 378. “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 17 18 and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of 19 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 20 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, filings that are “more than tangentially related to the 21 merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for 22 Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101–02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only 23 tangentially related to the merits may be sealed upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 24 1097. 25 Sealing motions filed in this district also must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of 26 sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). A party moving to seal a document in whole or in part 27 must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79- 28 5(d)(1)(A). “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain 1 documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are 2 sealable.” Id. 3 The Court has reviewed the administrative motion and the declaration submitted in support 4 thereof and finds that the parties have articulated compelling reasons and good cause to seal 5 portions of the Order. The Court has previously sealed the same and similar information as that 6 included in those portions Google seeks to redact, which include figures and statements from the 7 expert reports analyzing Google’s commercially sensitive gHire documents. See ECF 105; ECF 8 198; ECF 253; ECF 302; ECF 334. 9 10 Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion and directs Google to file a redacted version of the Order as a separate docket entry on or before October 3, 2018. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 15 16 Dated: September 26, 2018 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?