Le et al v. Zuffa, LLC
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 398 , 403 , 411 , 416 , 425 the parties' Motions to Seal related to 395 the Motion to Compel are GRANTED. Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal 419 as it relates to 414 the Motion to Extend Duration of Depositions is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 6/13/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
CUNG LE, et al.,
Case No. 2:15-cv-01045-RFB-PAL
(Mots to Seal)
(ECF Nos. 398, 403, 411, 416, 419, 425)
ZUFFA, LLC, et al.,
The court conducted a hearing on June 1, 2017, on numerous matters, including Plaintiff’s
Motion to Compel Defendant to Produce a Log of Communications for Dana White’s Discoverable
Telephone Numbers and Electronic Communication Devices and Directing Defendant to Submit
an Inventory of Electronic Communication Devices (ECF No. 395), and Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Extend Duration of Depositions for Certain Zuffa Executives (ECF No. 414). Numerous Motions
to Seal (ECF Nos. 398, 403, 411, 416, 419, 425) were filed in connection to the briefing of these
motions pursuant to the Protective Order issued by this court on February 10, 2016 (ECF No. 217).
The motions, responses, replies, and supporting exhibits and declarations filed on the
public record were heavily redacted, and numerous motions to seal were filed requesting that
redacted briefs, declarations and exhibits filed under seal remain redacted and sealed on the public
record. Plaintiffs’ motions to seal are based on their obligation to file documents produced in
discovery which opposing counsel marked as confidential pursuant to the protective order and
amended protective order governing confidentiality entered in this case. Defendants’ motions to
seal are based on arguments the redacted portions of the briefs and supporting declarations, and
exhibits filed under seal, are confidential and entitled to protection from public disclosure on
Hundreds of pages were filed in connection with the moving and responsive papers
involved in these motions. The court lacks the time and the resources to determine, on a line-by-
line, page-by-page, and document-by-document basis whether the parties have shown good cause
for each and every redaction and sealed document. The court finds that the documents filed on the
public record, coupled with the hearing transcript which describes the parties’ disputes complies
with the holdings of the Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit which create a presumption of public
access to judicial files and records. These are non-dispositive motions, and the parties’ publically
filed papers and hearing transcript accomplishes the objective of providing public access.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The parties’ Motions to Seal (ECF Nos. 398, 403, 411, 416, 425) related to the Motion
to Compel (ECF No. 395) are GRANTED.
2. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal (ECF No. 419) as it relates to the Motion to Extend Duration
of Depositions (ECF No. 414) is GRANTED.
DATED this 13th day of June, 2017.
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?