Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02069/USCOURTS-azd-2_09-cv-02069-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

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

27

28

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Penny Wagner, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc.; John Does IX; Jane Does I-X; ABC Corporations IX; and XYZ Partnerships I-X,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-09-2069-PHX-GMS

ORDER

The parties have submitted a stipulated protective order regarding confidentiality that

calls for discovery materials to be kept confidential by the parties and for confidential

documents to be submitted to the Court in camera (Dkt. # 23). The proposed order fails to

take into account Ninth Circuit law restricting the circumstances under which confidentiality

orders may be entered and documents in the Court’s file may be sealed. 

Two standards are relevant. “First, a ‘compelling reasons’ standard applies to [the

sealing of] most judicial records.” Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 565 F.3d 1106, 1115 (9th

Cir. 2009) (citing Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.

2006); Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135-36 (9th Cir. 2003)).

“This standard derives from the common law right ‘to inspect and copy public records and

documents, including judicial records and documents.’ To limit this common law right of

access, a party seeking to seal judicial records must show that ‘compelling reasons supported

by specific factual findings outweigh the general history of access and the public policies

Case 2:09-cv-02069-GMS Document 25 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

- 2 -

favoring disclosure.’” Id. (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178) (alteration and internal

citations omitted).

The second standard applies to discovery materials. “‘Private materials unearthed

during discovery’ are not part of the judicial record.” Id. (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at

1180) (alteration omitted). The “good cause” standard set forth in Rule 26(c) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure applies to orders rendering this category of documents confidential.

See id.; San Jose Mercury News, Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 187 F.3d 1096, 1103 (9th Cir. 1999)

(“It is well-established that the fruits of pretrial discovery are, in the absence of a court order

to the contrary, presumptively public. Rule 26(c) authorizes a district court to override this

presumption where ‘good cause’ is shown.”) (citations omitted). 

The good cause standard also applies to the sealed filing of documents attached to

non-dispositive motions because those documents are often “‘unrelated, or only tangentially

related, to the underlying cause of action.’” Phillips v. G.M. Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th

Cir. 2002); see Pintos, 565 F.3d at 1115. Documents attached to dispositive motions such

as motions for summary judgment, however, are governed by the compelling reasons

standard. See San Jose Mercury News, 187 F.3d at 1102; Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1136. The

parties do not establish good cause or compelling reasons merely by stipulating that

documents may be filed under seal 

The parties may submit a revised proposed order that takes into account these

standards. The stipulation or motion seeking entry of the order should show good cause for

a confidentiality order governing discovery materials. The proposed order should also reflect

the fact that any party seeking to file documents under seal must show good cause for

documents attached to non-dispositive motions or compelling reasons for documents attached

to dispositive motions.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying the Stipulation for Protective Order without

prejudice (Dkt. # 23).

DATED this 16th day of June, 2010.

Case 2:09-cv-02069-GMS Document 25 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 2