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

Filing 413

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 407 Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal and Redact Portions of Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion to Compel is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. See Order for Details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah on 10/13/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

Case 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-EJY Document 413 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 3

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

Plaintiffs,

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
15

Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal and Redact
Portions of Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (ECF No. 407).

16

As explained in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006),

17

courts generally recognize a “right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including

18

judicial records and documents.” Id. at 1178 citing Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589,

19

597 & n. 7 (1978). This right is justified by the interest of citizens who “keep a watchful eye on the

20

workings of public agencies.” Id. As Defendants know, a party seeking to file a document under

21

seal must file a motion to seal and must comply with the Ninth Circuit’s directives in Kamakana. A

22

party seeking to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must show

23

compelling reasons sufficient to overcome the presumption of public access. Id. If a sealing order

24

is permitted, it must be narrowly tailored. Press–Enterprise Co. v. Superior Ct. of Cal., Riverside

25

Cty., 464 U.S. 501, 512 (1984). When a document is attached to a non-dispositive motion, which is

26

the case here, the “public policies that support the right of access to dispositive motions … do not

27

apply with equal force . . ..” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (citation omitted). “Thus a particularized

28
1

Case 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-EJY Document 413 Filed 10/13/20 Page 2 of 3

1

showing, under the good cause standard of Rule 26(c), will suffice to warrant preserving the secrecy

2

of sealed discovery material attached to non-dispositive motions.” Id. at 1180 (citations, quotation

3

marks and brackets omitted).

4

Here, Defendants seek to seal exhibits to an opposition to a non-dispositive motion as well

5

as portions of the opposition itself. Defendants have demonstrated good cause for filing Exhibit B,

6

page Bates Numbered AYNV-108190 and Exhibit E in its entirety. These documents contain

7

confidential or proprietary information the public disclosure of which could result in misuse that

8

would harm Defendants. Defendants have not demonstrated good cause for filing Exhibit B, pages

9

Bates Numbered AYNV-108187-189, or Exhibit C, pages Bates Numbered AYNV-108191-193.

10

Defendants also did not attach Exhibit G to its filing under seal rendering it impossible for the Court

11

to review this document.

12

Accordingly,

13

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal

14

and Redact Portions of Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel (ECF No. 407) is GRANTED in

15

part and DENIED in part.

16
17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit B, page Bates Numbered AYNV-108190 and
Exhibit E in its entirety shall remain sealed.

18

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit B, pages Bates Numbered AYNV-108187-189

19

and Exhibit C, pages Bates Numbered AYNV-108191-193 contain no privileged or confidential

20

information, and nothing the Court can discern that is potentially privileged or confidential. As such,

21

these documents shall be unsealed.

22

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibit G to Defendants’ Opposition, identified as the

23

Declaration of Robert Z. Slaughter attaching Exhibits A-E was not filed under seal. Therefore,

24

Defendants must either move to strike this filing and refile this document with a request to file under

25

seal or take no action in which case the declaration and exhibits thereto shall remain unsealed.

26

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the portions of Defendants’ Opposition to ECF No. 397

27

referring to Exhibit B, page Bates Numbered AYNV-108190, or any portion of Exhibit E shall

28

remain redacted and sealed.
2

Case 2:15-cv-00531-RFB-EJY Document 413 Filed 10/13/20 Page 3 of 3

1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall file a revised, unsealed and unredacted

2

Opposition to ECF No. 397 removing redactions referencing Exhibit B, Bates Numbered pages

3

AYNV-108187-189, or Exhibit C, Bates Numbered pages AYNV-108191-193.

4

Dated this 13th day of October, 2020

5
6
7

ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3