Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02737/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02737-14/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 FILE PORTIONS OF 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2015 HEARING 

TRANSCRIPT UNDER SEAL

[Re: ECF 175]

Before the Court is an administrative motion by Elec-Tech International Co., Ltd and ElecTech International (H.K.) Co., Ltd. (“Moving Defendants”) to redact portions of the transcript 

from the September 10, 2015 hearing on Moving Defendants’ Motion for Civil Contempt and/or 

Sanctions (“Transcript”). ECF 175. The administrative motion is unopposed. 

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). When a party requests to seal judicial records attached to a nondispositive motion, such as the motion for civil contempt and/or sanctions at issue here, it must 

show “good cause.” Id. at 1180. 

At the September 10, 2015 hearing, Moving Defendants noted their intention to request the 

redaction of certain portions of the Transcript. See Redacted Transcript, ECF 175-3 at 32-33. On 

October 19, 2015, the Court issued an Order on Publication of Unredacted Hearing Transcript 

stating that the Transcript would be published without redaction unless the parties submitted their 

requests. ECF 174. Moving Defendants responded with this motion. 

Moving Defendants have established that the requested portions of the Transcript reflect 

information from exhibits previously ordered to be filed under seal. See Def.’s Mot at 1. Thus, 

Case 5:14-cv-02737-BLF Document 177 Filed 10/28/15 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

Moving Defendants have satisfied the “good cause” standard. 

Because this material is sealable, the request also complies with Civil Local Rule 79-5(b). 

The Court has reviewed the redactions and finds them to be narrowly tailored, as required by Civil 

Local Rule 79-5(d)(1)(C). As such, Moving Defendants’ motion to file the following portions of 

the Transcript under seal is GRANTED: (page:line): 52:13-17; 52:19; 52:21; 52:24-53:3; 55:4-6; 

55:8; 55:15; 55:25-56:1; 57:7-9; 57:16-18; 57:20-21; 58:22-24; 61:6-7; 61:11-25; 63:10-11; 

69:20;73:6; 73:13; 74:5; 74:7; 74:9; 74:21; 75:2; 75:4:75:6; 76:5-6; 76:16; 76:19-20; 76:21-22; 

77-22-24; 79:12-14; 79:20-23; 80:7-9; 80:15; 81:2; 81:11; 81:12-13; 81:17:81:19; 81:22-23; 

81:25-82:3; 82:9; 84:2; 84:6-7.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 28, 2015

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02737-BLF Document 177 Filed 10/28/15 Page 2 of 2