Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05498/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05498-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Computer Sciences Corporation
Defendant
Fred Nazif
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRED NAZIF, an individual

Plaintiff,

v.

COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, a

Nevada Corporation, and DOES 1-50,

inclusive, 

Defendants.

___________________________________/

No. C-13-5498 EMC

ORDER REGARDING PENDING

MOTIONS TO SEAL

(Docket Nos. 70, 72, 82, 84, 88)

Pending before the Court are various administrative motions to file documents or deposition

testimony under seal in connection with this Court’s consideration of the parties’ summary judgment

motions. See Docket Nos. 70, 72, 82, 84, 88. The Court issued its order on the substance of the

summary judgment motions on June 17, 2015, and entered final judgment the same day. Docket

Nos. 99-100. 

When deciding the pending motions to seal, the Court will apply the “compelling reasons”

standard. See Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006)

(holding that a party seeking to seal a judicial record submitted in connection with a dispositive

motion bears the burden of establishing that “compelling reasons” support the sealing request). As

this Court has noted previously, there is a strong presumption in favor of the public disclosure of

court records, and thus the “compelling reasons” standard is construed strictly: Only documents

containing “exceptionally sensitive information will be kept from the public.” O’Connor v. Uber

Case 3:13-cv-05498-EMC Document 102 Filed 06/22/15 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

Techs, Inc., No. 13-cv-3826 EMC, 2015 WL 355496, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2015) (emphasis in

original) (citations omitted).

Any party that wishes to maintain materials under seal that were filed in conjunction with the

recently adjudicated summary judgment motions must file a single declaration that explains if, and

how, the “compelling reasons” standard is met for each document and portion of a document sought

to be maintained under seal. The Court notes that an entire document is not necessarily sealable

simply because some portion of that document may appropriately be maintained under seal. Thus,

any such declaration filed shall state with specificity precisely what portion of a document contains

“exceptionally sensitive information” (using page and line numbers, or the nearest equivalent where

possible) and specifically why that specific information is a “trade secret” or otherwise subject to

sealing under the compelling reasons standard. See O’Connor, 2015 WL 355496, at *1; see also

Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179; Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 11-cv-1846-LHK,

2012 WL 2913669, at *1-2 (N.D. Cal. July 17, 2012). The declaration shall clearly identify those

documents, or portions of documents, that the party no longer seeks to maintain under seal.

The requested declaration(s), if submitted, must be filed with the Court no later than July 1,

2015. So that the parties can appropriately justify any sealing request with the requisite level of

detail, the parties may file the requested declaration(s) under seal. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

Dated: June 22, 2015

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-05498-EMC Document 102 Filed 06/22/15 Page 2 of 2