Brown et al v. Google LLC et al

Filing 190

ORDER granting #176 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal. Signed by Judge Susan van Keulen on 6/8/2021.(svklc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/8/2021)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

CHASOM BROWN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

8

GOOGLE LLC,

Re: Dkt. No. 176

Defendant.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

v.

9
10

Case No. 20-cv-03664-LHK (SVK)

Now before the Court is Google’s Administrative Motions to File Documents Under Seal

12
13

(Dkt. 176) seeking to seal portions of the Parties’ May 26, 2021 Joint Discovery Submission (Dkt.

14

177).

15

Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents,

16

including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d

17

1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7

18

(1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of

19

access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d

20

1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to

21

court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the
underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For
Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to
motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower
“good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party
moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local
Rule 79-5.

1

Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information the parties seek to seal

2

was submitted to the Court in connection with a discovery-related motion, rather than a motion

3

that concerns the merits of the case. The Court may reach different conclusions regarding sealing

4

these documents under different standards or in a different context. Having considered the

5

motions to seal, supporting declarations, and the pleadings on file, and good cause appearing, the

6

Court ORDERS as follows:

7
8
9
10

Document Sought to be
Sealed
Joint Submission

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Court’s Ruling
on Motion to
Seal
GRANTED as to
redacted portions
at pages 6, 10

12
13
14
15
16
17

Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
Narrowly tailored to protect
confidential technical information
regarding features of Google’s
operations, including the various
types of Google’s internal
identifiers/cookies and their
proprietary functions, that Google
maintains as confidential in the
ordinary course of its business and
is not generally known to the public
or Google’s competitors.

SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 8, 2021

18
19
SUSAN VAN KEULEN
United States Magistrate Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2