SATA GmbH & Co. KG v. Wenzhou T&E Industrial Co., Ltd. et al

Filing 45

ORDER Granting 44 Motion to File Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 9/11/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7

SATA GMBH & CO. KG,

8

Plaintiff,
vs.

9
10
11

WENZHOU T&E INDUSTRIAL CO., et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-02042-APG-NJK
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
FILE UNDER SEAL
(Docket No. 44)

12
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to file under seal Exhibit A attached to the
13
Declaration of Jonathan W. Fountain In Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment and
14
Permanent Injunction. Docket No. 44. The document at issue consists of the hourly rates charged by
15
Plaintiff’s counsel, Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP. See, e.g., Docket No. 43.
16
The Ninth Circuit has held that there is a presumption of public access to judicial files and
17
records, and that parties seeking to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions
18
must show compelling reasons sufficient to overcome the presumption of public access. See, e.g.,
19
Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006). Plaintiff represents
20
that this business information is Lewis Roca Rothgerber’s trade secrets and is not generally known.
21
Docket No. 44. The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to seal the hourly rates charged by
22
Plaintiff’s counsel that outweigh the public’s right to access. See, e.g., Mine O’Mine, Inc. v. Calmese,
23
2012 U.S. Dist. Lexis 53077, *10 (D.Nev. 2012). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to file under seal
24
(Docket No. 44) is GRANTED.
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
DATED: September 11, 2014
27
28

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge