Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05182/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05182-65/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE LDK SOLAR SECURITIES 

LITIGATION.

 /

This Document Relates to:

All Actions. /

No. C 07-05182 WHA

ORDER RE MOTIONS TO SEAL

DOCUMENTS RELATED TO

SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTIONS

The parties have filed twenty-eight motions to seal various documents related to

defendants’ motion for summary judgment and motions in limine to exclude plaintiff’s expert

witnesses, and plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment. As clearly stated in the Court’s

“Order Approving Amended Protective Order Subject to Stated Conditions” (Dkt. No. 130), the

Ninth Circuit requires compelling reasons to seal documents used in dispositive motions and

motions in limine, just as compelling reasons would be needed to justify a closure of a courtroom

during trial. The parties were therefore on notice that no request for a sealing order would be

allowed on summary judgment motions or motions in limine unless the movant first showed a

compelling reason, a substantially higher standard than “good cause.” This is true regardless of

any stipulation by the parties. Only social security numbers, names of juveniles, home addresses

and phone numbers, and trade secrets of a compelling nature (like the recipe for Coca-Cola, for

example) will qualify.

The parties have put forward compelling reasons to seal only a few of the documents

which they have sought to seal in connection with these motions. Defendants’ motion to file

Case 3:07-cv-05182-WHA Document 505 Filed 02/18/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

under seal exhibits A–G, I–K and M to the declaration of Jack Lai in support of defendants’

motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 358) is GRANTED because the sealed exhibits contain

bank account numbers and related highly sensitive financial information. Lead plaintiff’s motion

to seal his opposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 429) is GRANTED

because the sealed documents contain private personal information of third parties. Defendants’

motion to seal certain declarations in support of their reply memorandum in support of their

motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 482) is GRANTED because the sealed documents contain

private email addresses and telephone numbers.

Because no compelling reasons were put forth by either party as to why the other

identified documents should be filed under seal, the parties’ other motions to seal (Dkt. Nos. 336,

361, 364, 366, 368, 372, 377, 383, 390, 393, 397, 405, 411, 418, 431, 441, 442, 446, 448, 451,

453, 455, 458, 472 and 492) are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 18, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-05182-WHA Document 505 Filed 02/18/10 Page 2 of 2