Epic Games, Inc. v. Murphy-Johnson

Filing 18

ORDER granting 16 Motion to Seal Document. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 5/28/2014. (Sawyer, D.)

Download PDF
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION 5: 14-cv-230 EPIC GAMES, INC., A Maryland Corporation, Plaintiff, v. ORDER TIMOTHY FREDERICK MURPHYJOHNSON Defendant. This case comes before the Court on Plaintiff Epic Games, Inc.'s ("Epic") Consent Motion and Memorandum to Seal Exhibit and Replace with a Redacted Version. WHEREAS, the material proposed to be filed under permanent seal and replaced with a redacted version references a stock capitalization table that discloses confidential, highly-sensitive financial information about Epic and non-party current and former employees; WHEREAS, the material proposed to be made publicly available is a redacted version of that same material previously filed; and WHEREAS, the Court has considered other alternatives and finds the request to seal to be appropriate under the circumstances. NOW, THEREFORE, upon consideration of the record, Epic's consent motion and pursuant to the provisions of Rule 26 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 79.2, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Epic's consent motion is GRANTED. The stock capitalization table at issue is designated as Highly Confidential and will remain under permanent seal in all filings in which it is found in this matter. The Court is aware that the stock capitalization table has been included as an exhibit to Murphy-Johnson's notice of removal (D.E. 1-1 at Ex. C) and his answer to Epic's application for injunctive relief (D.E. 3-1 at Ex. C). The document will remain under seal in both places and will be replaced with the redacted version. SO ORDERED. This l::B_ day of May 2014. JA ES C. DEVER III Chief United States District Judge 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?