Juniper Networks, Inc. v. Andrade et al

Filing 15

ORDER GRANTING #8 DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 4/15/2020.(blflc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2020)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

SAN JOSE DIVISION

7
8

JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

Case No. 20-cv-02360-BLF

v.
BRUNO ANDRADE, MARS
INVESTMENT ACCELERATOR FUND
INC., NORTHSPRING CAPITAL
PARTNERS INC., JOSMEYR ALVES
DE OLIVEIRA, and RUBEN MARCOS
SEID,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE
UNDER SEAL
[Re: ECF 8]

Defendants.
15
16

Plaintiff Juniper Networks, Inc. filed this action in the Santa Clara County Superior Court

17

on February 8, 2020, asserting state law contract and fraud claims arising out of Plaintiff’s

18

acquisition of HTBASE Corporation. See Notice of Removal ¶ 1 & Exh. A, ECF 1. In the

19

Superior Court, Plaintiff moved to seal portions of the complaint and the entirety of Exhibit A to

20

the complaint, which is the Share Purchase Agreement that governed Plaintiff’s acquisition of

21

HTBASE . See Martin Decl. ¶¶ 4-5, ECF 8-1. Defendants removed the action to federal district

22

court on April 8, 2020. See Notice of Removal, ECF 1. The removal documents included the

23

redacted complaint that Plaintiff submitted to the Superior Court. See Notice of Removal.

24

In conjunction with the removal, Defendants filed the present administrative motion to seal

25

the same portions of the complaint, and Exhibit A to the complaint, that Plaintiff sought to seal in

26

the Superior Court. See Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, ECF 8. As discussed below,

27

the Court finds that Defendants’ motion satisfies the requirements of the applicable case

28

authorities and this Court’s Civil Local Rules.

1

“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records

2

and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of

3

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435

4

U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, filings that are “more than tangentially related to the

5

merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for

6

Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101-02 (9th Cir. 2016). Sealing motions filed

7

in this district also must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material.” Civil

8

L.R. 79-5(b). A party moving to seal a document in whole or in part must file a declaration

9

establishing that the identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A).

10

As asserted by Plaintiff in the Superior Court, and by Defendants here, the materials as to

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

which sealing is requested contain non-public, proprietary business information, the public

12

disclosure of which could bring harm to the parties from their competitors. See Martin Decl. ¶¶

13

5-8. This is sufficient to satisfy the compelling reasons standard. See Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809

14

F.3d at 1097 (compelling reasons standard met when material includes “sources of business

15

information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing.” (internal quotation marks and

16

citation omitted)). The sealing request is narrowly tailored to seek sealing of the confidential

17

Share Purchase Agreement and the portions of the complaint that discuss those contents.

18

Defendant’s counsel advised Plaintiff’s counsel of the Administrative Motion on or before the date

19

it was filed. See Martin Decl. ¶ 9. The deadline to oppose the Administrative Motion has elapsed

20

and no opposition has been filed. See Civ. L.R. 7-11 (opposition to administrative motion due 4

21

days after motion is filed).
ORDER

22
23

Defendants’ Administrative Motion to File Under Seal is GRANTED.

24

This order terminates ECF 8.

25
26
27
28

Dated: April 15, 2020
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge
2