In Re: MacBook Keyboard Litigation

Filing 192

Order by Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granting #189 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Joint Discovery Letter Brief re Clawback. (vkdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/9/2020)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISION

7
Case No. 18-cv-02813-EJD (VKD)

8
9

IN RE MACBOOK KEYBOARD
LITIGATION

11

ORDER GRANTING
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
SEAL JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER
RE CLAWBACK

12

Re: Dkt. No. 189

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

13
14

In connection with the parties’ joint discovery letter concerning defendant Apple, Inc’s

15

(“Apple”) request to claw back information revealed at a deposition that Apple contends is

16

protected under the attorney-client privilege (Dkt. No. 190), Apple filed an administrative motion

17

to file portions of the joint letter under seal. Dkt. No. 189. Having considered plaintiffs’

18

submission, the Court grants the administrative motion, as set forth below.

19

There is a strong presumption in favor of access by the public to judicial records and

20

documents accompanying dispositive motions that can be overcome only by a showing of

21

“compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings.” Kamakana v. City & Cty. of

22

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

23

However, the presumption does not apply equally to a motion addressing matters that are only

24

“tangentially related to the merits of a case.” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d

25

1092, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016), cert. denied sub nom. FCA U.S. LLC v. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 137 S. Ct.

26

38 (2016). A litigant seeking to seal documents or information in connection with such a motion

27

must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

28

Id. at 1098–99; Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179–80.

1

Apple’s motion to seal concerns information submitted in connection with a discovery

2

dispute. The underlying discovery dispute does not address the merits of the parties’ claims or

3

defenses, but rather whether defendants’ assertion of the attorney-client privilege is proper. The

4

material to be sealed is only tangentially related to the merits of the case. The Court therefore

5

applies the “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c).

6

The material proposed to be filed under seal is derived from a deposition that has been

7

designated “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” Apple contends that the material

8

encompasses confidential business communications and that the communications are also

9

privileged, which the parties dispute. In these circumstances, the Court finds that good cause

10

exists to seal the following material:

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Document

Portions to be Sealed
Pg. 1, 3rd and 4th and 7th to 9th lines of the
Joint Discovery Letter Brief re Clawback (Dkt. third full paragraph
No. 190)
Pg. 2, header 2, 4th and 5th lines of the third
full paragraph
Pg. 3, header 3, 3rd and 4th lines of the second
full paragraph
Pg. 4, 5th to 7th lines of the first full
paragraph, 1st and 2nd lines of the third full
paragraph
Pg. 5, 7th line of the third full paragraph
Pg. 6, 3rd to 5th and 7th and 8th lines of the
second full paragraph
Ex. A
Ex. B, 3rd sentence in the first full paragraph
of Monday, November 18, 2019 10:00 AM
email

22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 9, 2020

25
26
VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI
United States Magistrate Judge

27
28
2