Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-01276/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-01276-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute

---

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

GEC US 1 LLC, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

FRONTIER RENEWABLES, LLC, et al., 

 Defendants. 

FRONTIER RENEWABLES, LLC,

 Counterclaim Plaintiff, 

 v. 

ACTIV SOLAR GMBH, et al.,

 Counterclaim Defendants. 

Case No.: 16-cv-1276 YGR 

ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO 

FILE UNDER SEAL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 94, 102 

In a separate order concurrently filed, the Court resolves plaintiffs’ motion to enforce 

compliance with a prior order. In connection with that motion, plaintiffs filed two administrative 

motions to seal, pursuant to this Court’s Civil Local Rule 79-5. (Dkt. Nos. 94, 102.) This Order 

resolves the administrative motions to seal. 

The public holds a presumptive right of access to public records, including pretrial filings in 

civil cases. See Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006); 

In re Midland Nat. Life Ins. Co. Annuity Sales Practices Litig., 686 F.3d 1115, 1119 (9th Cir. 

2012). In the context of information proffered in support of dispositive motions or at trial, only a 

continuing, compelling reason will justify sealing the information or keeping it under seal. See In 

re Midland, 686 F.3d at 1119. However, “the usual presumption of the public’s right to access does 

not apply to non-dispositive motions with the same strength it applies to dispositive motions.” 

Dugan v. Lloyds TSB Bank, PLC, 2013 WL 1435223, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2013) (citing In re 

Midland, 686 F.3d at 1119). In the context of non-dispositive motions, the party seeking to place 

and keep information under seal need only make a showing of good cause. See id. at *1–2. “There 

Case 4:16-cv-01276-YGR Document 121 Filed 09/07/16 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 

may be ‘good cause’ to seal records that are privileged, contain trade secrets, contain confidential 

research, development or commercial information, or if disclosure of the information might harm a 

litigant’s competitive standing.” Id. at *2. 

The Court concludes that plaintiffs’ sealing requests are appropriate and narrowly tailored. 

Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED. 

This Order terminates Docket Numbers 94, 102. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: September 7, 2016 

_______________________________________ 

 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:16-cv-01276-YGR Document 121 Filed 09/07/16 Page 2 of 2