Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech Inc.

Opinion

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff, No. C 20-04808 WHA

v.

RUIFENG BIZTECH INC., et al., ORDER RE MOTIONS TO SEAL Defendants.

There is a strong public policy in favor of openness in our court system and the public is entitled to know to whom we are providing relief (or not). See Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–80 (9th Cir. 2006). 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. The compelling reasons standard applies to most judicial records. Evidentiary motions such as motions in limine and Daubert motions can be strongly correlative to the merits of a case. Id. at 1098– 1100. In addition, sealing motions filed in this district must be “narrowly tailored to seek whole or in part must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is sealable. Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). For example, “[t]he publication of materials that could result in infringement upon trade secrets has long been considered a factor that would overcome [the] strong presumption” in favor of access and provide compelling reasons for sealing. Apple Inc. v. Psystar Corp., 658 F.3d 1150, 1162 (9th Cir. 2011). Compelling reasons may also warrant sealing for “sources of business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing,” especially where the public has “minimal interest” in the information because it “is not necessary to the public's understanding of the case.” See Nixon v. Warner Comms., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). “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 sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). “Supporting declarations may not rely on vague boilerplate language or nebulous assertions of potential harm but must explain with particularity why any document or portion thereof remains sealable under the applicable legal standard.” Bronson v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc., 2019 WL 7810811, at *1 (N.D. Cal. May 28, 2019) (citing Civ. L.R. 79-5). Upon review of the pertinent motions to seal and their accompanying declarations, this order finds the parties have made the requisite showing to seal certain portions of the submitted documents. The proposed redactions are narrowly tailored. Without deciding on whether the asserted trade secrets ultimately qualify as trade secrets, this order rules as follows: Dkt. Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning No. 44-1 Quintara’s Amended GRANTED. Although a previous order permitted Trade Secret Disclosure Quintara to file this document under seal (Dkt. No. 40), this order confirms that this document contains material asserted to constitute trade secrets. 51-4 Defendants’ Motion for DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Protective Order material lodged conditionally under Pending Plaintiff’s seal (Dkt. No. 52). Identification of Trade Secrets 51-6 Quintara’s Amended GRANTED. See entry for Dkt. No. 44-1. Trade Secret Disclosure 51-8 Quintara’s Amended GRANTED. See entry for Dkt. No. 44-1. Trade Secret Disclosure 56-2 Wiseman Decl. ISO GRANTED Granted as to Wiseman Decl. Exh. Defendants’ Motion to as to the A: lines 12 and 21 on page 9; and Strike requested Lines 17 and 21 on page 11. This material. material contains material asserted to constitute trade secrets (Dkt. No. 58) 56-6 Defendants’ Motion to DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal any of Strike the material lodged conditionally under seal (Dkt. No. 58) 56-8 Wiseman Decl. ISO GRANTED See entry for Dkt. No. 56-2. Defendants’ Motion to as to the Strike requested material. Defendants’ Motion GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 145-3 ISO Motion for as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Terminating or Issue requested Declaration contains information Sanctions and all material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, supporting as well as confidential customer and documentation vendor information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 148-1). Nova Declaration ISO GRANTED See entry for Dkt. No. 145-3. 145-4 Defendants’ Motion for as to the Terminating or Issue requested Sanctions material. 165-4 Motion for Partial DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Summary Judgment and material lodged conditionally under all supporting seal (Dkt. No. 166). documentation (Part 1) 165-5 Motion for Partial GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Summary Judgment and as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson all supporting requested Declaration contains information documentation (Part 2) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). Motion for Partial GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 165-6 Summary Judgment and as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson all supporting requested Declaration contains information documentation (Part 3) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 165-7 Novoa Declaration ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Motion for Summary as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Adjudication requested Declaration contains information material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 165-9 Wiseman Declaration DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this ISO Motion for Partial material lodged conditionally under Summary Judgment seal (Dkt. No. 166). (declaration only) 165-10 Wiseman Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as ISO Motion for Partial as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Summary Judgment requested Declaration contains information (exhibits A–S) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, as well as Quintara’s confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 165-11 Wiseman Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as ISO Motion for Partial as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Summary Judgment requested Declaration contains information (exhibits T–BB) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 168-2 Defendants’ Motion to GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Exclude and Disqualify as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Expert Tomo Kimura requested Declaration contains information and all supporting material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, documentation as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 172). 168-6 Defendants’ Motion to DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Exclude and Disqualify material lodged conditionally under Expert Tomo Kimura seal (Dkt. No. 172). 168-8 Wiseman Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as ISO Defendants’ as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Motion to Exclude and requested Declaration contains information Disqualify Expert material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, Tomo Kimura as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 172). 170-4 Li Declaration ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Plaintiff’s Opposition to as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Motion for Partial requested Declaration contains information Summary Judgment material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No.170-1).

Defendants also seek to seek to seal material that contains confidential financial information, the public disclosure of which would cause defendants competitive harm (Wiseman Decl, Dkt. No. 171). 177-4 Defendants’ Reply ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Motion for Summary as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Adjudication and all requested Declaration contains information supporting documents material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, (Part 1) the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1).

177-5 Defendants’ Reply ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Motion for Summary as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Adjudication and all requested Declaration contains information supporting documents material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, (Part 2) the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1).

177-7 Li Declaration in GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Support of Defendants’ as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Motion for Summary requested Declaration contains information Adjudication material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1). 177-9 Wang Declaration in GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Support of Defendants’ as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Motion for Summary requested Declaration contains information Adjudication material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1).

201-4 J. James Li Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as ISO Plaintiff’s Motion as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson for Issue, Evidentiary, requested Declaration contains information and Monetary Sanctions material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 201-1). 206-4 Defendants’ Opposition GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as to Plaintiff’s Motion for as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Issue and Evidentiary requested Declaration contains information Sanctions and all material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, supporting documents the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 200). 206-6 Li Declaration ISO Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Defendants’ Opposition material lodged conditionally under to Plaintiff’s Motion for seal (Dkt. No. 209). Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions 206-8 Wang Declaration ISO DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Defendants’ Opposition material lodged conditionally under to Plaintiff’s Motion for seal (Dkt. No. 209). Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions 206-10 Ng Declaration ISO DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Defendants’ Opposition material lodged conditionally under to Plaintiff’s Motion for seal (Dkt. No. 209). Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions 206-12 Novoa Declaration ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Defendants’ Opposition as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson to Plaintiff’s Motion for requested Declaration contains information Issue and Evidentiary material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, Sanctions the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 200). 206-14 Wiseman Declaration DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this ISO Defendants’ material lodged conditionally under Opposition to Plaintiff’s seal (Dkt. No. 209). Motion for Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions 1 Within TWENTY-EIGHT DAYS of the date of this order, the parties must, to the extent 2 needed, file documents in full compliance with this order. 4 5 Dated: March 8, 2022. 6 Pee 7 [ A = WILLIAM ALSUP 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 ll a 12

15 16 € = 17

Zz 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28