BGC Partners, Inc. et al v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc. et al

Filing 343

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 285 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Directed to Third Party Subpoena Recipients, and Certain Exhibits, Under Seal is DENIED except as stated below. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED tha t Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 shall remain temporarily sealed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if any party wishes to present additional information to the Court justifying sealing Exhibits 2, 3, and 4, such party must do so within ten (10) days of this Order. If no additional information is provided by the close of business on the tenth (10th) day following the date of this Order, Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 shall be unsealed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Directed to Third-Party Subpoena Recipients 283 shall be unsealed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah on 4/29/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

Case 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-EJY Document 343 Filed 04/29/20 Page 1 of 2

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4
5

NEWMARK GROUP, INC., G&E
ACQUISITION COMPANY, LLC and BGC
REAL ESTATE OF NEVADA, LLC

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Case No. 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-EJY

Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
AVISON YOUNG (CANADA) INC.;
AVISON YOUNG (USA) INC.; AVISON
YOUNG-NEVADA, LLC, MARK ROSE,
THE NEVADA COMMERCIAL GROUP,
JOHN PINJUV, and JOSEPH KUPIEC; DOES
1 through 5; and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES
6 through 10,
Defendants.

13
14

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Reply in Support of Motion to

15

Compel Directed to Third Party Subpoena Recipients, and Certain Exhibits, Under Seal. ECF No.

16

285. No opposition to this Motion was filed by Defendants.

17

As the party seeking to seal a judicial record, Plaintiffs must meet its burden of overcoming

18

the strong presumption in favor of access and public policies favoring disclosure. Kamakana v. City

19

and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that those who seek to

20

maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high threshold of

21

showing that “compelling reasons” support secrecy). “Many courts have applied the compelling

22

reasons standard to . . . temporary restraining orders.” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC,

23

809 F.3d 1092, 1096 n.2 (9th Cir. 2016) (collecting cases); see also Selling Source, LLC v. Red River

24

Ventures, LLC, No. 2:09-cv-01491-JCM-GWF, 2011 WL 1630338, at *5 (finding requests for

25

preliminary injunctive relief should be treated as dispositive motions for purposes of sealing court

26

records) (D. Nev. Apr. 29, 2011). The mere fact that the production of records may lead to a party’s

27

embarrassment, incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not alone compel the court to

28

seal its records. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir.
1

Case 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-EJY Document 343 Filed 04/29/20 Page 2 of 2

1

2003). Compelling reasons require a demonstration of something more, such as when court files

2

have become a vehicle for improper purposes, including use of records to gratify private spite,

3

promote public scandal, disseminate libelous statements, or circulate trade secrets. Nixon v. Warner

4

Commc’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978).

5

The Court has considered the contents of Plaintiffs’ Reply and the documents sought to be

6

sealed. The Court finds (i) Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 do not contain confidential business information, (ii)

7

Exhibit 5 does not contain confidential business information, and (iii) the redaction of Plaintiffs’

8

Reply is unsupported as the redaction does not refer to confidential business information.

9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Reply in

10

Support of Motion to Compel Directed to Third Party Subpoena Recipients, and Certain Exhibits,

11

Under Seal (ECF No. 285) is DENIED except as stated below.

12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 shall remain temporarily sealed.

13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if any party wishes to present additional information to

14

the Court justifying sealing Exhibits 2, 3, and 4, such party must do so within ten (10) days of this

15

Order. If no additional information is provided by the close of business on the tenth (10th) day

16

following the date of this Order, Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 shall be unsealed.

17
18
19

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Compel Directed to Third-Party Subpoena Recipients (ECF No. 283) shall be unsealed.
DATED: April 29, 2020

20
21
22

ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
27
28
2