Le et al v. Zuffa, LLC
Filing
253
ORDER Granting #228 , #232 , #237 , and #246 Motions to Seal. The Clerk of the Court SHALL UNSEAL the moving papers incorrectly filed under seal, which do not contain confidential material: #227 Motion to Seal Unredacted Motion and Exhibits, #227 -3 Proposed Order, #237 Motion to Seal Unredacted Reply, #237 -1 Declaration, and #237 -2 Proposed Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 5/12/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
8
Plaintiffs,
9
10
11
Lead Case No. 2:15-cv-01045-RFB-PAL1
CUNG LE, et al.,
ORDER
v.
(Mots. to Seal – Dkt. #228,
#232, #237, #246)
ZUFFA, LLC, d/b/a UFC ULTIMATE
FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP,
Defendant.
12
13
This matter is before the Court on the parties’ Motions to Seal (Dkt. #228, #232, #237,
14
#246). These Motions are referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and
15
LR IB 1-3 and 1-9 of the Local Rules of Practice. The Motions seek leave to file under seal
16
certain documents and exhibits referenced in the filings related to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Challenge
17
Privilege Designation (Dkt. #229) and the parties’ Joint Status Report (Dkt. #245).
18
This is an antitrust action and the Court has entered a Stipulated Protective Order
19
(Dkt. #217) governing documentation and testimony that is confidential to the parties’ internal
20
business strategies and other sensitive information of a proprietary business nature. The subject
21
documents contain confidential information regarding Defendant Zuffa, LLC’s internal finances,
22
financial terms and incentives of contractual negotiations, and business strategies and analysis
23
and were filed under seal because Zuffa’s counsel designated the documents as “confidential”
24
pursuant to the parties’ Stipulated Protective Order. The parties have narrowly tailored their
25
sealing requests by filing redacted versions of the documents containing confidential
26
information. See (Dkt. #229, #240, #242, #244).
27
1
28
Member Case Nos.: 2:15-cv-01046-RCJ-NJK; 2:15-cv-01055-APG-GWF; 2:15-cv-01056-RFB-GWF; and 2:15cv-01057-JCM-CWH.
1
1
Having reviewed and considered the matter in accordance with the Ninth Circuit’s
2
directives set forth in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006),
3
the Court finds that the parties have met their burden of establishing good cause for these
4
documents to remain sealed. Accordingly,
5
IT IS ORDERED:
6
1. Motions to Seal (Dkt. #228, #232, #237, #246) are GRANTED.
7
2. The documents and exhibits referenced in the motions SHALL REMAIN UNDER
8
SEAL: Unredacted Motion to Challenge Revised Protective Order (Dkt. #227-4),
9
Sealed
Exhibits
(Dkt. #227-1,
#227-2),
Unredacted
Response
(Dkt. #231),
Unredacted Reply (Dkt. #237-3), Unredacted Joint Status Report (Dkt. #245).
10
11
3. The Clerk of the Court SHALL UNSEAL the moving papers incorrectly filed under
12
seal, which do not contain confidential material: Motion to Seal Unredacted Motion
13
and Exhibits (Dkt. #227),2 Proposed Order (Dkt. #227-3), Motion to Seal Unredacted
14
Reply (Dkt. #237), Declaration (Dkt. #237-1), Proposed Order (Dkt. #237-2).
15
Dated this 12th day of May, 2016.
16
17
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
This filing was duplicative of the Motion to Seal (Dkt. #228).
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?