Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al

Filing 141

MINUTE ORDER granting 123 Motion to Seal: The Clerk is DIRECTED to SEAL 88 , 93 , and 101 . Plaintiffs are ORDERED to separately file on this Court's electronic docket the redacted replacements for those documents, such that the docket entry for the redacted replacement for each sealed document or set of documents contains a link to the original, now sealed, complete version of that document or set of documents. Plaintiffs must file these three replacements within 7 court days of the date of this Minute Order by Judge John C Coughenour.(GO)

Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al

Doc. 141

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 MINUTE ORDER ­ 1 v. VIRTUMUNDO, INC., a Delaware corporation, d/b/a ADNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM; ADKNOWLEDGE, INC., a Delaware corporation, d/b/a AKNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM; SCOTT LYNN, an individual; and JOHN DOES, 1­X, Defendants. The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge: This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal (Dkt. No. 123) portions of documents in the record. In this Court's May 15, 2007 Order (Dkt. No. 121), the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion to seal the Declaration of Derek Newman (Dkt. No. 101) (May 15, 2007 Order 21:13­23), Defendants' motion to seal a reply brief and its exhibit (Dkt. Nos. 92 and 93) (May 15, 2007 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE JAMES S. GORDON, Jr., a married individual, d/b/a `GORDONWORKS.COM'; OMNI INNOVATIONS, LLC., a Washington limited liability company, Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. C06-204JCC MINUTE ORDER

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Order 21:24­22:6), and Defendants' motion to seal a motion and its exhibits (Dkt. Nos. 87 and 88) (May 15, 2007 Order 22:7­12). The Clerk was directed to unseal Dkt. Nos. 87, 88, 92, and 93, while Dkt. No. 101 remained unsealed. Plaintiffs have now filed a motion to seal three of these documents (Dkt. Nos. 88, 93, and 101) and to replace them with versions containing limited redactions (see Exs. A, B, and C to the instant motion, respectively). The Court finds that Plaintiffs' requests, which are significantly narrower than the previously denied requests to seal, meet the standard of Local Civil Rule CR 5(g), by narrowly tailoring redactions to protect confidential information without concealing more information than necessary from public view. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' motion. The Clerk is hereby DIRECTED to SEAL Dkt. Nos. 88, 93, and 101. Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED to separately file on this Court's electronic docket the redacted replacements for those documents, such that the docket entry for the redacted replacement for each sealed document or set of documents contains a link to the original, now sealed, complete version of that document or set of documents. Plaintiffs must file these three replacements within 7 court days of the date of this Minute Order. DATED this 19th day of July, 2007. BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk of Court By /s/ C. Ledesma Deputy Clerk

MINUTE ORDER ­ 2