Bungie Inc v. Veterancheats.com

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: February 7, 2023
• Docket: 2:21-cv-01114
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 BUNGIE, INC., a Delaware corporation, No. C21-1114-SKV 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SEAL 12 MOTION FOR DEFAULT AND v. SUPPORTING DECLARATIONS 13 MIHAI CLAUDIU-FLORENTIN, an [PROPOSED] 14 individual, d/b/a VETERANCHEATS.COM; DOE 1 a/k/a BLAZE, an individual; DOE 2, 15 a/k/a KNORR, an individual; DOE 3 a/k/a 16 JOHN MCBERG, an individual, and DOES 4-10, 17 Defendants. 18 19 This matter having come before the Court upon Plaintiff Bungie, Inc.’s Motion to 20 Seal pertaining to its Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Mihai Claudiu-

21 Florentin (“Claudiu-Florentin”), including: (1) portions of the Declaration of James 22 Barker in Support of the Motion for Default Judgment (the “Barker Declaration”), 23 (2) Exhibit 5 to the Barker Declaration in its entirety, (3) Exhibits 3 and 7 to the 24 Declaration Christopher Varas in Support of the Motion for Default Judgment in their 25 entirety, and (4) those portions of the Motion for Default (the “Brief”) that reference the 26 sealed portions of the Barker and Varas Declarations or exhibits thereto. Having reviewed the relevant record, the Court GRANTS the motion. 1 When considering whether to seal portion s of the Court’s record, a “strong 2 presumption in favor of access is the starting point.” Kamakana v. City & Cty. of 3 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Any records related to motions that are 4 more than tangentially related to the merits of the underlying action are subject to the 5 “compelling reasons” standard. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d

6 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). In determining whether there are compelling reasons to seal,

7 “courts should consider all relevant factors, including: ‘the public interest in 8 understanding the judicial process and whether disclosure of the material could result in 9 improper use of the material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon 10 trade secrets.’” Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d at 1135 (quoting 11 Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995)). 12 Compelling reasons may exist to seal “trade secrets, marketing strategies, product 13 development plans, detailed product-specific financial information, customer

14 information, internal reports and other such materials that could harm a party's 15 competitive standing.” In re Apple Inc. Device Performance Litig., No. 5:18-MD-02827- 16 EJD, 2019 WL 1767158, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 22, 2019). Courts in the Ninth Circuit 17 (and this District in particular) have recognized that information describing the internal 18 and confidential information about the operations of computer hardware and software 19 that is meant to limit access to the hardware’s or software’s operations, and information 20 on how to circumvent it, generally meets the “compelling reasons” standard and should

21 be sealed, because revealing that information would allow competitors to obtain 22 commercial advantages or allow unscrupulous hackers to circumvent the publisher’s 23 technological security measures. E.g., Philips North America, LLC v. Summit Imaging, 24 Inc., Case No. C19-1745-JLR, 2021 WL 1895836, * 2 (W.D. Wash. 2021); Genuine 25 Enabling Tech., LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., Case No. C19-000351-RSM, 2020 WL 26 4366181, at *1 (W.D. Wash. July 30, 2020); In re Google Inc. Gmail Litig., No. 13-MD- 02430-LHK, 2013 WL 5366993, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 25, 2013). 1 The portions of the Brief and Declaration s, and exhibits thereto, that Bungie seeks 2 to seal or redact reveal confidential documents produced through third-party discovery, 3 and technical details of how the program operates. Revealing such information in a 4 public filing not only would allow competitors insight into Bungie’s security measures, 5 but could also allow new cheat software developers to replicate the Cheats and would

6 violate third-party confidential designations. These are sufficiently compelling reasons to

7 keep the referenced material under seal. Bungie has publicly filed redacted copies of the 8 materials wherever possible, which is sufficient to meet the public’s interest in knowing 9 the non-confidential details of these proceedings. 10 DATED this 7th day of February, 2023.

11 A 12 S. KATE VAUGHAN 13 United States Magistrate Judge

14 Presented by: 15 KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON 16 LLP

17 s/ Christopher T. Varas Christopher Varas (WA Bar No. 32875) 18 Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP 19 1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3700 Seattle, WA 98101 20 Telephone: 206.516.3088 Facsimile: 206.623.6793 21 cvaras@kilpatricktownsend.com

22 Admitted Pro Hac Vice 23 Crystal Genteman 1100 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 2800 24 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: 404.815.6500 25 cgenteman@kilpatricktownsend.com 26 Attorneys for Plaintiff Bungie, Inc.