VeriFone, Inc. v. A Cab, LLC

Filing 25

ORDER Granting 18 Motion to Seal. Exhibit 2 to the Motion to Seal will be filed under seal. It Is Further Ordered that a redacted copy of exhibit 2 be filed on the record. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 6/2/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

VERIFONE, INC., a Delaware corporation,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
A CAB, LLC, a Nevada limited liability
)
corporation,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:15-cv-00157-GMN-GWF
ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal Exhibit 2 to Motion to Dismiss

14

Amended Counterclaim (#18), filed on April 16, 2015. Defendant filed a Response (#21) on May

15

11, 2015. Plaintiff filed its Reply (#24) on May 22, 2015.

16

The Plaintiff requests that Exhibit 2 to the Motion to Dismiss (#16) be sealed in order to

17

prevent harm to the Plaintiff’s future business. Exhibit 2 is the Dispatch Agreement, signed by

18

both parties, that forms the basis for this case. Specifically, the Plaintiff notes that the Agreement

19

contains “pricing, leasing, warranty, and other negotiated competitive business terms.” (#18, p.2).

20

There is a general public right to inspect judicial records and documents. See Nixon v.

21

Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978); Kamakana v. City and County of

22

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). This right leads to a “strong presumption in favor

23

of access to court records.” Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir.

24

2003) (citing Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1985)). Compelling reasons to

25

seal documents generally exists when “court files might have become a vehicle for improper

26

purposes.” Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598. A Court will protect “sources of business information that

27

might harm a litigant’s competitive standing.” Id. Generally, trade secrets are protected under the

28

Kamakana standard. 447 F.2d at 1179.

1

The Defendant accurately notes in its Response (#21) that some of the material that Plaintiff

2

wishes to have sealed is already present in the Complaint (#1). Plaintiff specifically requested to

3

seal “pricing, leasing, and warranty terms,” as they were confidential. (#18, p. 3). The Plaintiff

4

claims that “[p]ublic disclosure of that information would risk significant harm to Verifone’s

5

current business relationships and its ability to negotiate future similar contracts in a competitive

6

marketplace.” Id. In Plaintiff’s Complaint, they included the following information about the

7

contract:

8

10. Under the Dispatch Agreement, Verifone agreed to lease dispatch
equipment, software, and services to A Cab, and to provide training,
support, and warranty services for the equipment for ten years.

9
10

11. In exchange, under the Dispatch Agreement, A Cab agreed to
grant Verifone the exclusive right to place dispatch systems in A Cab
taxis, and to pay Verifone $65 per month per dispatch system with a
minimum monthly payment of $4,500.

11
12

12. Additionally, under the Dispatch Agreement, the parties agreed
that Verifone would directly and exclusively provide A Cab with
electronic payment processing services, paying A Cab a $1.00 per
transaction “swipe fee,” after conclusion of the Services Agreement
(under which Taxipass was then providing payment processing
services), which was anticipated to be on December 17, 2014.

13
14
15
16

13. In August 2011, in connection with, and as an inducement to
enter into the Dispatch Agreement, Verifone paid A Cab a one-time
$80,000 signing bonus.

17
18

(#1), ¶¶ 10-13.

19

The Plaintiff further included information about the contract it its Motion to Dismiss

20

Amended Counterclaim (#16), where it discussed in detail the clauses in the contract dealing with

21

each party’s obligations to the other and the clause forbidding consequential damages. The

22

Plaintiff has publicly revealed much of the material in the Dispatch Agreement that they now seek

23

to keep confidential, and has therefore waived confidentiality for those portions of the Dispatch

24

Agreement. The provisions in the Agreement which have not yet been publicly revealed and

25

contain confidential material may, however, be filed under seal.

26

...

27

...

28

...
2

1

The Court instructs the Plaintiff to file a copy of the Dispatch Agreement on the record,

2

with the remaining confidential provisions redacted and with the provisions that are already

3

publicly filed in the Complaint and the Motion to Dismiss unredacted. Accordingly,

4
5

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal (#18) is granted. Exhibit
2 to the Motion to Seal will be filed under seal.

6

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a redacted copy of Exhibit 2 be filed on the record.

7

DATED this 2nd day of June, 2015.

8
9
10

GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3