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

Filing 657

ORDER granting 656 Motion to Seal 655 Sealed Unredacted Version of Filed Document. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah on 4/28/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ALZ)

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

Plaintiff,

7
8
9
10
11

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

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,

12

Defendants.

13
14

Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Seal Exhibits to, and Redact

15

Sections of, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Portions of Carlyn Irwin’s Expert Testimony. ECF No.

16

656.

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). Where a party seeks to seal documents

22

attached to a non-dispositive motion, the “public policies that support the right of access to

23

dispositive motions … do not apply with equal force … .” Id. at 1179 (citation omitted).

24

The mere fact that the production of records may lead to a party’s embarrassment,

25

incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not alone compel the court to seal its records.

26

Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003). Compelling reasons

27

require a demonstration of something more, such as when court files have become a vehicle for

28

improper purposes, including use of records to gratify private spite, promote public scandal,
1

1

disseminate libelous statements, or circulate trade secrets. Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, 435 U.S.

2

589, 598 (1978). Further, a party “may not simply rely on the Stipulated Protective Order … to

3

justify sealing documents filed in the record under seal.” Heath v. Tristar Products, Inc., Case No.

4

2:17-cv-02869-GMN-PAL, 2019 WL 12311995, at *1 (D. Nev. Apr. 17, 2019) discussing and citing

5

Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1133 (reliance on a blanket protective order, without more, will not make a

6

showing of good cause); Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int'l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 475-76 (9th Cir. 1992)

7

(blanket stipulated protective orders are over inclusive by nature and do not include a finding of

8

“good cause”).

9

The Court reviewed the Motion to Seal, the exhibits sought to be sealed, and the redactions.

10

The Court finds Exhibits 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Portions of Carlyn

11

Irwin’s Expert Testimony contain confidential and proprietary information that is properly sealed.

12

The Court also finds the redactions in the publicly filed Motion are proper as they refer to the exhibits

13

the Court agrees should be sealed.

14

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Seal

15

Exhibits to, and Redact Sections of, Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Portions of Carlyn Irwin’s Expert

16

Testimony (ECF No. 656) is GRANTED.

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude

18

Portions of Carlyn Irwin’s Expert Testimony and the Motion itself, found at ECF No. 655, are and

19

shall remain sealed.

20

Dated this 28th day of April, 2023.

21
22
23

ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2