LT Game International Ltd. v. Shuffle Master, Inc.

Filing 117

ORDER Granting 114 Motion to Seal 115 Third Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 4/21/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10
11
12

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
SHUFFLE MASTER, INC.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)
LT GAME INTERNATIONAL LTD.,

Case No. 2:12-cv-01216-JAD-GWF
ORDER
Motion to File Portions of Plaintiff’s
Third Amended Complaint Under
Seal (#114)

13
14

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff LT Game International LTD’s Motion to

15

File Portions of Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint Under Seal (#114), filed on April 10, 2014.

16

Plaintiff subsequently filed its Third Amended Complaint (#115) under seal on April 10, 2014.

17

The Supreme Court has recognized a “general right to inspect and copy public records and

18

documents, including judicial records and documents.” See Nixon v. Warner Comm., Inc., 435 U.S.

19

589, 597 & n. 7 (1978). Unless a particular court record is one “traditionally kept secret,” a “strong

20

presumption in favor of access” is the starting point. See Foltz v. State Farm Mutual Auto.

21

Insurance Company, 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003) (citing Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d

22

1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995)). The 9th Circuit has held that the sealing of filings is appropriate to

23

protect the parties’ proprietary business operations and trade secrets. See Kamakana v. City and

24

County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). The party seeking to seal a judicial

25

record bears the burden of overcoming the strong presumption by articulating the compelling

26

reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and the

27

public policies favoring disclosure. Id.

28

...

1

Here, the Court previously entered a Protective Order (#32) governing the handling of

2

documents and discovery in connection with this action. The aforementioned protective order was

3

entered pursuant to a stipulation wherein both parties acknowledged the sensitive and confidential

4

nature of certain information related to the subject matter of this action. Plaintiff indicates that

5

such information includes, but is not limited to, non-public, proprietary data, trade secrets, and

6

commercially sensitive business information, including dealings and contracts with customers and

7

prospective customers. Both parties stipulated to the highly sensitive and private nature of this

8

information pursuant to the terms of the Protective Order. The Court therefore finds that Plaintiff

9

establishes good cause to file portions of its Third Amended Complaint under seal. Accordingly,

10

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to File Portions of Plaintiff’s Third

11

Amended Complaint Under Seal (#114) is granted.

12

DATED this 21st day of April, 2014

13
14
15

______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2