Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02380/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02380-26/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1051 Trademark Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JARRITOS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

LOS JARRITOS, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 05-02380 JSW

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT

PREJUDICE ADMINISTRATIVE

MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 

On February 22, 2007, the parties jointly moved to file under seal the deposition pages

of exhibit 2 of Plaintiff Jarritos, Inc.’s opposition to Defendants’ motion for sanctions. Exhibit

2 had been publicly filed by Plaintiff two days prior. 

As a public forum, the Court will only entertain requests to seal that establish good

cause and are narrowly tailored to seal only the particular information that is genuinely

privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise has a compelling need for

confidentiality. Documents 

may not be filed under seal pursuant to blanket protective orders covering multiple documents. 

In addition, counsel should not attempt to seal entire pleadings or declarations without a

particularized showing explaining why the request could not be more narrowly tailored. Any

order granting a request to seal shall direct the sealing of only those documents, pages, or if

practicable, those portions of documents or pages that contain the information requiring

confidentiality. All other portions of such documents shall remain in the public file. Civil L.R.

79-5(b) & cmt.

Case 3:05-cv-02380-JSW Document 129 Filed 02/26/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

The parties’ request to file under seal simply states that the document contains a

description of Defendants’ accounting practices. It is not evident to the Court, however, from a

review of the document in question that the deposition pages indeed contain information that is

genuinely privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise has a compelling need for

confidentiality. Accordingly, the request is DENIED without prejudice to the parties making a

proper showing that confidentiality is necessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 26, 2007 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-02380-JSW Document 129 Filed 02/26/07 Page 2 of 2