RES Exhibit Services, LLC v. LNW Gaming, Inc. f/k/a SG Gaming, Inc. and f/k/a Bally Gaming, Inc.

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 ISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 * * *

4 RES EXHIBIT SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-01953-APG-EJY

5 Plaintiff,

6 v. ORDER

7 LNW GAMING, INC. f/k/a SG GAMING, INC. f/k/a BALLY GAMING, INC., 8 Defendant. 9 10 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal and Redact its Opposition to 11 Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions. ECF No. 50. Plaintiff seeks to keep sealed its unredacted 12 Opposition, the Declaration of James V. Leonardo, and Exhibits J and K to the Declaration of Chad 13 W. Flansburg. Id. at 1-2. Plaintiff says the material is properly sealed and redacted to shield the 14 parties’ non-public business and financial information. Id. at 3-4. 15 As the party seeking to seal a judicial record, Plaintiff must meet its burden of overcoming 16 the strong presumption in favor of access and public policies favoring disclosure. Kamakana v. City 17 and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that those who seek to 18 maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet the high threshold of 19 showing that “compelling reasons” support secrecy). However, where a party seeks to seal 20 documents attached to a non-dispositive motion, the “public policies that support the right of access 21 to dispositive motions … do not apply with equal force ….” Id., 417 F.3d at 1179 (citation omitted). 22 The mere fact that the production of records may lead to a party’s embarrassment, incrimination, or 23 exposure to further litigation will not alone compel the court to seal its records. Foltz v. State Farm 24 Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003). Compelling reasons require a 25 demonstration of something more, such as when court files have become a vehicle for improper 26 purposes, including use of records to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, disseminate 27 libelous statements, or circulate trade secrets. Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 598 1 || information, and internal policies and procedures, a reviewing court may grant the motion to seal 2 || there are compelling reasons sufficient to outweigh the public’s interest in disclosure of tl 3 || information. Callahan vy. PlusFour, Inc., Case No. 2:17-CV-2513 JCM (GWF), 2019 WL 30249 4 || at *5 (D. Nev. Jan. 23, 2019), citing Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178-79. 5 The Court reviewed the Motion to Seal as well as the materials sought to be sealed | 6 || redacted. The Court grants Plaintiffs Motion as the material contains proprietary business a1 7 || financial information and contents of contractual agreements and negotiations between the parties 8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Seal and Redact 1 9 || Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions (ECF No. 50) is GRANTED. 10 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits J and K to the Declaration of Chad W. Flansbu 11 || CECF Nos. 48-11, 48-12) are and shall remain sealed. The unredacted versions of □□□□□□□□□ 12 || Opposition and the Declaration of James V. Leonardo and Exhibits J and K to the □□□□□□□□□□□ 13 || Chad W. Flansburg at ECF No. 49 are and shall remain sealed. 14 DATED this 18th day of July, 2023.

16 . ELAYNA\J. YO A 17 UNITED STATESMA RATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28