Opinion
21-cv-02103-BLF
08-24-2022
JESSICA DAY, Plaintiff, v. GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING GEICO'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL
[RE: ECF NO. 95]
BETH LAB SON FREEMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before the Court is Defendant GEICO's corrected administrative motion to file under seal portions of and exhibits to GEICO's opposition to Plaintiff's motion for class certification. See ECF No. 95. The Court has considered the motion and supporting declaration. For the following reasons, the motion to seal GEICO's materials is GRANTED.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.'” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are “more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101-102 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097.
In addition, in this district, all parties requesting sealing must comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5. That rule requires, inter alia, the moving party to provide “the reasons for keeping a document under seal, including an explanation of: (i) the legitimate private or public interests that warrant sealing; (ii) the injury that will result if sealing is denied; and (iii) why a less restrictive alternative to sealing is not sufficient.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(1)(i). Further, Civil Local Rule 79-5 requires the moving party to provide “evidentiary support from declarations where necessary.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(c)(1)(ii).
II. DISCUSSION
This Court previously determined “that the compelling reasons standard applies to motions to seal documents relating to class certification.” Adtrader, Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 17-CV-07082-BLF, 2020 WL 6391210, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020).
The material that GEICO seeks to seal includes non-public, confidential financial information about GEICO's operations in California. See ECF 95-1 at 1. GEICO seeks to file this information under seal because GEICO's counsel asserts that if the information is in the public domain, it could be used by GEICO's competitors to GEICO's disadvantage. See ECF 95-1 at 2. Plaintiffs do not oppose GEICO's request. The Court finds that GEICO has met the “compelling reasons” standard for sealing financial information about its operations in California because release of the information threatens its competitive interests. See Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., No. 17-CV-04810-HSG, 2020 WL 2838812, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020); In re Qualcomm Litig., No. 3:17-CV-0108-GPC-MDD, 2017 WL 5176922, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017). The Court rules as follows on the documents GEICO seeks to have sealed:
ECF No.
Document
Portions to Seal
Ruling
93
GEICO's Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification
Highlighted portions at 1:7-8, 2:14-15, 3:9-19, 4:1-12, 4:25, 5:1-11, 5:13, 5:14, 5:17-27, 8:24-25, 12:12-13, 16:6-7, 16:11
GRANTED, as containing information related to GEICO's internal financial results and sensitive proprietary business issues.
93-1
Declaration of Russell Ward in Support of GEICO's Response in Opposition to Motion for Class Certification
Entire exhibit
GRANTED, as containing information related to GEICO's internal financial results and sensitive proprietary business issues.
93-2
Declaration of William Hackman in Support of
Entire exhibit
GRANTED, as containing information
GEICO's Response in Opposition to Motion for Class Certification
related to GEICO's internal financial results and sensitive proprietary business issues.
III. ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that GEICO's sealing motion is GRANTED.