Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04065/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-04065-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Property

---

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

PATRICK COTTER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LYFT, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 13-cv-04065-VC 

ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO FILE 

UNDER SEAL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 70, 73

A party seeking to seal a judicial record then bears the burden of overcoming a "strong 

presumption in favor of access." Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179

(9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, neither motion to file under seal meets 

the "high threshold of showing that 'compelling reasons' support secrecy," id. at 1180.

Accordingly, the motions are denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 11, 2015

______________________________________

VINCE CHHABRIA

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-04065-VC Document 96 Filed 03/13/15 Page 1 of 1