Opinion
Case No. 3:16-cv-0136-LRH-VPC
12-09-2016
FEDERAL TRADE COMISSION, Petitioner, v. GENERAL LLC; and MEDIA LLC, Defendants.
ORDER
Before the court are the parties' various motions to seal. ECF Nos. 41, 44 and 46.
As an initial matter, the court is acutely cognizant of the presumption in favor of public access to papers filed in the district court. See Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995). Therefore, a party seeking to file materials under seal bears the burden of overcoming that presumption by showing that the materials are covered by an operative protective order and are also deserving of confidentiality. See Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2005). Specifically, a party must "articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure." Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal citations omitted).
The court has reviewed the documents and pleadings on file in this matter and finds that the documents at issue in the present motions contain sensitive information and discussions of, references to, and verbatim quotations from, submissions provided to the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") during compulsory proceedings. Such materials produced in response to compulsory actions and filings before the FTC are confidential as a matter of law. See 15 U.S.C. § 57b-2(b); 16 C.F.R. § 4.10(g). Therefore, the court finds that the parties have satisfied their burdens to show compelling reasons for filing the various pleadings under seal. Accordingly, the court shall grant the parties' motions.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the parties' various motions to seal (ECF Nos. 41, 44 and 46) are GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 9th day of December, 2016.
/s/_________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE