Hunt v. Zuffa, LLC et al

Filing 133

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED 114 , 129 defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White's motions for leave to file exhibits under seal are DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court must maintain the exhibits at issue in ECF No. 114 and No. 129 under seal for 14 days from the date of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 7/23/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6

MARK HUNT,

7
8
9
10

Case No. 2:17-cv-00085-JAD-CWH
Plaintiff,
ORDER

v.
ZUFFA, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

11
12

Presently before the court are defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White’s motions for leave

13

to file exhibits under seal (ECF Nos. 114, 129), filed on March 23, 2018, and April 20, 2018,

14

respectively. Defendants request that various exhibits in support of their pending motion to

15

dismiss be sealed because they are subject to confidentiality agreements.

16

Generally, the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. Kamakana v. City &

17

Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Such records are presumptively publicly

18

accessible. Id. Consequently, a party seeking to seal a judicial record “bears the burden of

19

overcoming this strong presumption.” Id. In the case of dispositive motions, the party seeking to

20

seal the record “must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that

21

outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the

22

public interest in understanding the judicial process.” Id. at 1178-79 (alteration and internal

23

quotation marks and citations omitted). Among the compelling reasons which may justify sealing

24

a record are “when such court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes, such as

25

the use of records to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or

26

release trade secrets.” Id. at 1179 (quotation omitted). However, avoiding a litigant’s

27

“embarrassment, incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not, without more, compel

28

the court to seal its records.” Id.

1

In this case, while the court previously has sealed certain documents and discovery is

2

proceeding pursuant to a protective order, defendants are now asking to seal documents related to

3

a case-dispositive motion. Given that defendants do not articulate compelling reasons to do so,

4

the court will deny their motions to seal without prejudice.

5
6
7
8

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White’s motions for
leave to file exhibits under seal (ECF Nos. 114, 129) are DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court must maintain the exhibits at issue in
ECF No. 114 and No. 129 under seal for 14 days from the date of this order.

9
10

DATED: July 23, 2018

11
12
13

C.W. HOFFMAN, JR.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2