Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02919/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02919-28/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent 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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

NORTEK AIR SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

DMG CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-02919-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING SEALING 

MOTIONS

[Re: ECF 358, 359]

Before the Court are parties’ administrative motions to file under seal portions of the Trial 

Transcripts consisting of testimony given while the courtroom was sealed to the public. ECF 358, 

359. For the reasons stated below, the motions are GRANTED.

I. LEGAL STANDARD

“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 

and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of 

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 

U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are 

“more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of 

“compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 

1101–02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed 

upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097. 

In addition, sealing motions filed in this district must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing 

only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). A party moving to seal a document in whole or in 

part must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-

5(d)(1)(A). “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain 

documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are 

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 376 Filed 09/02/16 Page 1 of 3
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

sealable.” Id. 

II. DISCUSSION

The Court has reviewed the parties’ sealing motions and respective declarations in support 

thereof. The Court finds the parties have articulated compelling reasons to seal certain portions of 

the submitted documents. The proposed redactions are also narrowly tailored. The Court’s 

rulings on the sealing requests are set forth in the tables below:

A. ECF 358

Identification of Documents 

to be Sealed

Description of Documents Court’s Order

Trial Transcript Vol. 4 (July 

27, 2016) 

788:1-23, 25 (beginning after 

“with”); 789:1-3

Testimony relating to 

confidential business 

information of Defendant.

GRANTED.

Trial Transcript Vol. 6 (August 

1, 2016) 

1318:12-19; 1319:1-13 

(beginning after “an attorney” 

on 1319:1), 17-22; 1320:6-14; 

1399:13-17; 1399:21-1400:6 

Testimony relating to 

confidential business 

information of Defendant.

GRANTED.

B. ECF 359

Identification of Documents 

to be Sealed

Description of Documents Court’s Order

Trial Transcript Vol. 3 (July 

26, 2016) 

348:9-10 (beginning after 

“about” and ending with 

“Labs.”); 348:18-20 

(beginning after “reasons”); 

348:22-351:7; 368:6-8 

(beginning after “2015”); 

368:18-372:24

Testimony relating to 

confidential business 

information of Plaintiff.

GRANTED.

Trial Transcript Vol. 4 (July 

27, 2016) 

600:3-19

Testimony relating to 

confidential business 

information of Plaintiff.

GRANTED.

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 376 Filed 09/02/16 Page 2 of 3
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

III. ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the sealing motions at ECF 358, 359 are GRANTED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 376 Filed 09/02/16 Page 3 of 3