San Diego County Credit Union v. Citizens Equity First Credit Union

Filing 33

ORDER Denying Defendant's 30 Motion to File Documents Under Seal. The Court denies Defendant's motion to seal subject to refiling the motion to seal with a redacted document. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 7/25/18. (dlg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

SAN DIEGO COUNTY CREDIT
UNION,

15
16

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO SEAL

Plaintiff,

13
14

Case No.: 18cv967-GPC(RBB)

v.
[Dkt. No. 30.]

CITIZENS EQUITY FIRST CREDIT
UNION,
Defendant.

17
18

Defendant filed a motion to seal to file the entirety of the Declaration of Jennifer

19

Flexer submitted in support of its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

20

(Dkt. No. 30.) No opposition was filed.

21

There is a presumptive right of public access to court records based upon the

22

common law and the first amendment. See Nixon v. Warner Comm., Inc., 435 U.S. 589,

23

597 (1978); Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206,

24

1212-13 (9th Cir. 2002). Nonetheless, access may be denied to protect sensitive

25

confidential information. Parties seeking to seal documents in a dispositive motion must

26

meet the high threshold requiring “compelling reasons” with specific factual findings to

27

support a sealing. Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-80

28
1
18cv967-GPC(RBB)

1

(9th Cir. 2006) (citing Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th

2

Cir. 2003)). The “compelling reasons” test requires showing more than just “good

3

cause.” Id.

4

According to the undersigned judge’s chambers rules, documents filed under seal

5

will be limited to only those documents, or portions thereof, necessary to protect such

6

sensitive information. Therefore, a redacted document may be appropriate to protect the

7

portions of the brief or declaration containing confidential information.

8
9

Here, Defendant argues it seeks to file under seal Flexor’s declaration because it
includes confidential business information such as the number of members that it has in

10

various geographic areas. While such information may be compelling, sealing the

11

entirety of Flexor’s declaration is not supported by compelling reasons. Accordingly, the

12

Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to seal subject to refiling the motion to seal with a

13

redacted document.

14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 25, 2018

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
18cv967-GPC(RBB)