Intuit Inc. v. H&R Block, Inc.

Filing 167

ORDER GRANTING 160 PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on November 25, 2024. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2024)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

INTUIT INC.,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

HRB TAX GROUP, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 5:24-cv-00253-BLF
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
SEAL
[Re: ECF No. 160]

12
Before the Court is Plaintiff Intuit Inc.’s (“Intuit”) Administrative Motion to Seal Portions

13
14

of the Transcripts of the Preliminary Injunction Hearing on September 30 and October 1 and

15

Exhibits Introduced at the Hearing. ECF No. 160 (“Mot.”). For the following reasons, the Court

16

GRANTS Intuit’s motion.

17
18

I.

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

19

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

20

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

21

U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong

22

presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto.

23

Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to

24

motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden

25

of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of

26

access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d

27

1092, 1100–01 (9th Cir. 2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79.

28

In addition, in this district, all parties requesting sealing must comply with Civil Local

1

Rule 79-5. That rule requires, inter alia, the moving party to provide “the reasons for keeping a

2

document under seal, including an explanation of: (i) the legitimate private or public interests that

3

warrant sealing; (ii) the injury that will result if sealing is denied; and (iii) why a less restrictive

4

alternative to sealing is not sufficient.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(1). Further, Civil Local Rule 79-5

5

requires the moving party to provide “evidentiary support from declarations where necessary.”

6

Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(2). And the proposed order must be “narrowly tailored to seal only the sealable

7

material.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(3).

8

II.

The Court finds that the “compelling reasons” standard applies because the motion for

9

United States District Court
Northern District of California

DISCUSSION

10

preliminary injunction is “more than tangentially related” to the merits of this lawsuit. See

11

Newmark Realty Cap., Inc. v. BGC Partners, Inc., No. 16-CV-01702, 2017 WL 8294174, at *2

12

(N.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2017); E. W. Bank v. Shanker, No. 20-CV-07364, 2021 WL 3112452, at *17

13

(N.D. Cal. July 22, 2021).
Compelling reasons exist to seal the identified segments of the transcripts and exhibits.

14
15

Intuit seeks to seal “portions of the preliminary injunction hearing transcripts and exhibits

16

admitted at the hearing that contain sensitive information related to Intuit’s provision of an expert

17

final review” to TurboTax Live Assisted customers. Mot. at 1. The relevant information includes

18

“competitively sensitive” training materials as well as details about the tools that Intuit uses to

19

enable its tax experts to assist consumers. Id. at 1–2. Courts in this Circuit have recognized that

20

the compelling reasons standard is satisfied for such confidential training materials. See Cohan v.

21

Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., No. 213-CV-00975, 2014 WL 12596287, at *3 (D. Nev. Nov.

22

7, 2014); Baack v. Asurion, LLC, No. 220-CV-00336, 2021 WL 3115183, at *4 (D. Nev. July 22,

23

2021).

24

Additionally, Intuit seeks to seal “sensitive confidential business data and metrics.” Mot.

25

at 2. It is well-established that there are compelling reasons to seal confidential and competitively

26

sensitive business data. See, e.g., Johnstech Int’l Corp. v. JF Microtechnology SDN BHD, No. 14-

27

CV-02864, 2016 WL 4091388, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2016) (granting motion to seal “product-

28

specific customer data that could be used to the company’s competitive disadvantage”); Adtrader,
2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 17-CV-07082, 2020 WL 6387381, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2020).
Finally, the Court finds that the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to seal only the
sealable material. See Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(3).
The Court’s ruling is summarized below:
ECF No.
or
Exhibit
No.

Document

Intuit
Ex. 8

Intuit Internal
Help Article,
“Expert Review
End-to-End
Guide”

Intuit
Ex. 12

Spreadsheet of
TurboTax tNPS
Scores from Tax
Year 2023

Intuit
Ex. 17

Intuit Internal
Help Article,
“What’s the
difference
between an Expert
Review and a Full
Service upgrade?”

Intuit
Ex. 71

Screenshot of
“Preview My
1040” Tool

10

Portion(s) to Seal

In its entirety

Ruling

Granted, as containing sensitive
tax expert training
materials. See ECF No. 160-1
¶ 5.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

In its entirety

Granted, as containing sensitive
and confidential business data
and metrics. See ECF No. 160-1
¶ 6.

15
16
17
18
19

In its entirety

Granted, as containing sensitive
tax expert training
materials. See ECF No. 160-1
¶ 5.

20
21
22

In its entirety

23
24
25
26
27
28
3

Granted, as revealing
confidential and proprietary tax
expert tools used by TurboTax
experts. See ECF No. 160-1 ¶ 5.

1
2
3

Intuit
Ex. 78

4

Screenshot of
Two-Year
Comparison
Tool

In its entirety

Granted, as revealing
confidential and proprietary tax
expert tools used by TurboTax
experts. See ECF No. 160-1 ¶ 5.

5
6
7
8

Block
Ex. 18

Intuit Internal
Guide, “TurboTax
Live – Assisted”

In its entirety

Granted, as containing sensitive
tax expert training
materials. See ECF No. 160-1
¶ 5.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

ECF No.
149

Transcript of
Hearing on
9/30/2024

ECF No.
149

Transcript of
Hearing on
9/30/2024

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The highlighted portions at
24:8–11; 33:11–14; 37:3–4;
39:19–20; 41:14–42:22;
43:8–44:2; 44:10–14; 45:13–
46:4; 46:18–47:11; 47:14– Granted, as containing sensitive
15; 47:18–48:6; 48:8–10;
material related to tax expert
48:18–49:13; 49:19–50:18; training and tools. See ECF No.
63:11–14; 64:3–4; 64:22–23;
160-1 ¶ 5.
65:3–7; 65:15–66:17; 67:1–
68:2; 68:5–19; 68:21–25;
69:3–16; 69:19–70:1; 70:3–9;
70:23–71:10; 96:8–16; and
98:5–7.
The highlighted portions at
52:10–11; 52:13; 52:15–16;
52:21; 53:11; 53:13–15;
53:18; 53:22–23; 53:25;
54:6–7; 56:19; 56:22; 56:24–
25; 57:5; 57:9; 71:20; 71:25;
72:4; 72:21; 72:25; 73:2;
74:15; 74:19; 75:1–2; 75:5; Granted, as containing sensitive
and confidential business data
75:16; 76:1; 76:10; 76:22;
76:24; 77:2; 79:16; 79:23; and metrics. See ECF No. 160-1
83:2; 83:5; 91:2; 91:5; 95:9;
¶ 6.
95:23–24; 96:20; 96:24–25;
97:1; 129:23; 152:11–15;
152:21–23; 162:23; 170:14;
170:18–19; 171:3; 172:10;
173:1; 187:13; 187:23;
187:25; 188:6; 188:10;
198:12; 198:18; 198:20–23;
and 199:9.
4

1
2
3

ECF No.
150

Transcript of
Hearing on
10/01/2024

Granted, as containing sensitive
The highlighted portions at
material related to tax expert
305:24; 306:2–3; 345:18–21; training and tools. See ECF No.
and 346:1.
160-1 ¶ 5.

4
5
6
7
8

ECF No.
150

Transcript of
Hearing on
10/01/2024

Granted, as containing sensitive
The highlighted portions at
and confidential business data
301:25; 302:2; 347:1;
and metrics. See ECF No. 160-1
347:4–5; 348:24; 357:23;
¶ 6.
358:1; and 377:2–3.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

III.

ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Administrative Motion to

12

Seal Portions of the Transcripts of the Preliminary Injunction Hearing on September 30 and

13

October 1 and Exhibits Introduced at the Hearing (ECF No. 160) is GRANTED.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17
18
19

Dated: November 25, 2024
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5