Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02737/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02737-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Account Receivable

---

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ELEC-TECH INTERNATIONAL CO., 

LTD., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-02737-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF 

THE MARCH 12, 2015 HEARING 

TRANSCRIPT ON DEFENDANTS' 

MOTION TO DISMISS

[Re: ECF 126]

On March 12, 2015, the parties in the above-captioned action appeared for oral argument 

on Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Thereafter, on March 25, Defendants provided notice that they 

intended to request redaction of the hearing transcript because the parties and Court discussed at 

the hearing information that had been filed under seal. See ECF 124. Before the Court is 

Defendants’ motion to file portions of the hearing transcript under seal. For the reasons below, the 

Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion. 

Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, 

including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 

1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Two standards govern motions to seal documents, a “compelling 

reasons” standard, which applies to most judicial records, and a “good cause” standard, which 

applies to “private materials unearthed during discovery.” Cf. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. 

Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2002). A party that seeks to seal portions of a 

public hearing transcript must meet the “compelling reasons” standard.

In the Declaration of Michael Powell, submitted by Defendants in support of the motion to 

seal, Defendants outline the eleven portions of the transcript they seek to seal: (1) page 24, lines 

19-23; (2) page 27, lines 3-14; (3) page 33, lines 10-24; (4) page 34, lines 1-6; (5) page 34, lines 7-

Case 5:14-cv-02737-BLF Document 127 Filed 04/16/15 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

15; (6) page 34 line 16 through page 36 line 22; (7) page 37 lines 3-24; (8) page 38 line 9 through 

page 40 line 7; (9) page 47 line 18 through page 52 line 1; (10) page 52 line 19 through page 54 

line 22; and (11) page 58 line 11 through page 60 line 1. See Powell Decl., ECF 126-1 at 2-5. 

Defendants state that each of these portions of the hearing transcript references factual information 

that was filed under seal in exhibits to the James Declaration in support of Defendants’ motion to 

dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, including exhibits 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 45 

to the James Declaration. See, e.g., Powell Decl. at 3-4. The Court ordered each of these exhibits 

sealed because the information contained within them met Phillips’ compelling reasons standard: 

specifically, these documents contained information about Elec-Tech’s business practices, 

recruitment efforts, and discussions regarding partnerships with other product manufacturers. See

Sealing Order, ECF 98 at 2-3. 

The Court has reviewed the redactions requested by Defendants, and finds that they are 

narrowly tailored and seek to seal only the portions of the transcript that reference factual 

information contained within these previously sealed exhibits. As such, the Court finds that 

Defendants’ sealing request meets the requirements of Civil Local Rule 79-5(d)(1)(B). 

Because Defendants’ have shown compelling reasons to seal this information, the Court 

HEREBY ORDERS SEALED the following portions of the Hearing Transcript at ECF 123: 

Document Portion of Document Sought to Be Sealed

Hearing Transcript 24:19-23

Hearing Transcript 27:3-14

Hearing Transcript 33-10-24

Hearing Transcript 34:1-6

Hearing Transcript 34:7-15

Hearing Transcript 34:16-36:22

Hearing Transcript 37:3-24

Hearing Transcript 38:9-40:7

Hearing Transcript 47:18-52:1

Hearing Transcript 52:19-54:22

Hearing Transcript 58:11-60:1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 16, 2015

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02737-BLF Document 127 Filed 04/16/15 Page 2 of 2