Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06418/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-06418-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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

ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER, & CO., INC., et

al.

Plaintiffs,

 v.

EDGEWOOD PARTNERS INS. CENTER, et

al.

Defendants. /

No. C 07-06418 JSW

ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO SEAL

On January 4, 2008, Defendants filed an administrative motion to file documents under

seal. Defendants’ motion seeks to seal documents that reference information that has been

sealed pursuant to Plaintiffs’ request. Because Defendants are relying on Plaintiffs’ designation

of the documents as confidential, Plaintiffs had an obligation pursuant to Local Civil Rule 79-

5(d) to file a declaration to establish that the information is sealable. On January 7, 2008,

Plaintiffs filed the declaration of Sarju A. Naran, which stated that all of the documents filed by

Defendants should be sealed.

As a public forum, the Court will only entertain requests to seal that establish good

cause and are narrowly tailored to seal only the particular information that is genuinely

privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise has a compelling need for

confidentiality. Documents 

may not be filed under seal pursuant to blanket protective orders covering multiple documents. 

In addition, counsel should not attempt to seal entire pleadings or declarations without a

particularized showing explaining why the request could not be more narrowly tailored. Any 

Case 3:07-cv-06418-JSW Document 59 Filed 01/09/08 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

order granting a request to seal shall direct the sealing of only those documents, pages, or if

practicable, those portions of documents or pages that contain the information requiring

confidentiality. All other portions of such documents shall remain in the public file. Civil L.R.

79-5(b) & cmt.

A review of the documents at issue make clear that the request to file under seal is over

broad. Plaintiffs, in connection with their own motions to seal, specifically detail which

portions of their documents contain sealable information. In contrast, Defendants’ motion listed

their entire brief and 57 entire declarations. The Court therefore finds that Plaintiffs’ showing is

insufficient. By no later than January 10, 2008, Plaintiffs are directed to make a further

showing, detailing which specific portions, if any, of the documents in question contain sealable

information. The Court shall reserve ruling on Defendants’ motion to file documents under seal

pending receipt of Plaintiffs’ further showing. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 9, 2008 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-06418-JSW Document 59 Filed 01/09/08 Page 2 of 2