Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_08-cv-08009/USCOURTS-azd-3_08-cv-08009-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1121 Trademark Infringement

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Hells Angels Motorcycle Corporation, a

Nevada Nonprofit Corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Company 81, LLC, a New York Limited

Liability Company, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-8009-PCT-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 filed with the Court under seal. (Dkt. # 26.) 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, 504 F.3d 792, 801 (9th

Cir. 2007) (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

Case 3:08-cv-08009-GMS Document 28 Filed 12/18/08 Page 1 of 3
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 -

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

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, 504 F.3d at 802. 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 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. Accordingly,

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 3:08-cv-08009-GMS Document 28 Filed 12/18/08 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 -

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED denying the stipulation (Dkt. # 26) without prejudice.

DATED this 18th day of December, 2008.

Case 3:08-cv-08009-GMS Document 28 Filed 12/18/08 Page 3 of 3