Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08063/USCOURTS-azd-3_07-cv-08063-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright 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

TOM BEAN, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

HOUGHTON MIFFLIN HARCOURT

PUBLISHING COMPANY, AND R.R.

DONNELLEY & SONS COMPANY, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-8063-PCT-JAT

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Joint Stipulated Motion to Seal Exhibits to Plaintiff’s

Responses to Defendants’ Motions for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. # 107). Based upon

Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006), the Court finds that

documents that contain revenues, expenses, profits, or other future financial projections

information do not constitute good cause justifying an order from this Court sealing the

proposed exhibits.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Stipulated Motion to Seal Exhibits to Plaintiff’s

Responses to Defendants’ Motions for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. # 107) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall strike the lodged

proposed sealed exhibits at Doc. # 108, Doc. # 109, Doc. # 110, and Doc. # 111.

Case 3:07-cv-08063-JAT Document 124 Filed 09/24/09 Page 1 of 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

- 2 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall have 10 days from the date of this

Order to file a joint stipulation of facts that this Court may rely upon in resolving the pending

motions for summary judgment.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the parties cannot agree upon a joint stipulation

of facts that this Court may rely upon in resolving the pending motions for summary

judgment, then the party responsible for producing the proposed sealed exhibits shall have

an additional 10 days to redact the information it considers to be confidential in a manner that

satisfies Plaintiff–the party requesting and receiving the proposed sealed exhibits. If the

parties agree upon a redacted version of the proposed sealed exhibits, Plaintiff shall have 5

days to filed the redacted version of the proposed sealed exhibits UNSEALED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the parties cannot agree upon a joint stipulation

of facts and if the parties cannot agree upon a redacted copy of the proposed sealed exhibits,

then Plaintiff shall have 5 days to file the proposed sealed exhibits UNSEALED.

DATED this 24th day of September, 2009.

Case 3:07-cv-08063-JAT Document 124 Filed 09/24/09 Page 2 of 2