Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_20-mc-80020/USCOURTS-cand-4_20-mc-80020-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANN TREBOUX,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARC TETRO, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 20-mc-80020-KAW 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL 

CASE AND ALL DOCUMENTS

Re: Dkt. No. 4

On January 27, 2020, Plaintiff Ann Treboux filed a “Request to Serve a Subpoena to 

Produce Documents” in Case No. 19-cv-2691, Mark Tetro, Inc. v. Treboux, currently proceeding 

in the Southern District of New York. (Dkt. No. 1.) On January 31, 2020, the Court denied the 

request as moot, as the subpoena had already been issued and Plaintiff did not require permission 

from the Court to serve it. (Dkt. No. 3.)

On February 12, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to seal the case and all documents. 

(Pl.’s Mot. to Seal, Dkt. No. 4.) Plaintiff asserts that the existence of this case and other lawsuits

has resulted in Plaintiff’s inability to sign a lease on an apartment or get a job because people do a 

web search of her name and find these lawsuits. (Id. at 2.) Specifically, Plaintiff raises concerns 

about a prospective employer or landlord not wanting to know the facts in a separate case, Case 

No. 19-cv-583-SBA, Trickey v. Treboux. (Id. at 3.)

The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to seal. “Historically, courts have recognized a 

‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and 

documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2005) 

(quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 n.7 (1978)). “Unless a particular 

court record is one traditionally kept secret, a strong presumption in favor of access is the starting 

Case 4:20-mc-80020-KAW Document 5 Filed 02/26/20 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

point.” Id. (internal quotation omitted). The burden is therefore on the party seeking to seal a 

judicial record to “overcom[e] this strong presumption by meeting the ‘compelling reasons’ 

standard. That is, the party must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual 

findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring 

disclosure . . . .” Id. at 1178-79 (internal quotations omitted). “‘[C]ompelling reasons’ sufficient 

to outweigh the public’s interest in disclosure and justify sealing court records exist when such 

court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes, such as the use of records to 

gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade 

secrets.” Id. at 1179.

Here, Plaintiff seeks to seal the entirety of the case. Plaintiff, however, cites no facts 

specific to the filings of this case that would be problematic to a landlord or prospective employer. 

Plaintiff also cites no authority, and the Court has found none, that a Plaintiff is entitled to seal the 

very existence of a suit. In light of the strong presumption in favor of public access, the Court 

DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to file this case under seal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 26, 2020

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:20-mc-80020-KAW Document 5 Filed 02/26/20 Page 2 of 2