Ivanti et al v. Shea
Filing
30
MEMORANDUM DECISION and Order denying Without Prejudice 6 Motion to File Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells on 2/20/18. (jlw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
IVANTI, INC. and LANDESK SOFTWARE
SINGAPORE PTE., LTD.,
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 2:18-cv-00092
STEPHEN SHEA,
District Judge Ted Stewart
Defendant.
Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells
Plaintiffs Ivanti, Inc. and LANDesk Software Singapore Pte., Ltd. (Ivanti) seek to file the
following documents under seal that are exhibits to their Motion for Temporary Restraining
Order: 1
1. Redacted Portions of the Declaration of Simon Storey and Exhibit B thereto, filed under
seal herewith as Exhibit A.
2. Redacted Portions of the Declaration of Steve Bemis and Exhibit A thereto, filed under
seal herewith as Exhibit B.
3. Exhibits A, B, C, and E to the Declaration of Adam Jones, filed under seal herewith as
Exhibit C.
4. Redacted portions of the Declaration of Carlton Hwee, filed under seal herewith as
Exhibit D. 2
In support Ivanti alleges these are “confidential trade secrets and internal communications that, if
disclosed, could subject Ivanti to irreparable harm.” 3 They include pricing structures for supply
chains and the strategy behind such chains. 4
The court has reviewed the proposed sealed exhibits and finds there is some information
that need not be entirely sealed. For example, in the exhibits attached to the Declaration of
1
Docket no. 4.
2
Motion p. 2.
3
Id.
4
See id.
Adam Jones exhibit A contains portions of an email that need not be entirely sealed and exhibit
C contains terms and conditions of an agreement that need not be entirely sealed. Rather than
sealing the entire document such documents should be publicly filed with the trade secret
portions redacted.
Under Rule 5-3 “The sealing of pleadings, motions, memoranda, exhibits, and other
documents or portions thereof … is highly discouraged.” 5 There has been a general trend toward
over sealing matters such that information that should not be sealed gets brushed into a sealed
document. “The records of the court are presumptively open to the public” and the court finds
some of the proposed sealed documents in Ivanti’s motion contain information that is not
“information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method,
technique, or process, that: (a) derives independent economic value, actual or
potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable
by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its
disclosure or use; and (b) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the
circumstances to maintain its secrecy. 6
Accordingly, the court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Ivanti’s Motion to Seal. Once
Ivanti further scrutinizes the information to be sealed a renewed motion may be filed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 20 February 2018.
Brooke C. Wells
United States Magistrate Judge
5
DUCivR 5-3(1) (2017).
6
Utah Code § 13-24-2(4).
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?