Shields v. Federation Internationale De Natation

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 INTERNATIONAL SWIMMING LEAGUE, Case No. 18-cv-07394-JSC LTD, Case No. 18-cv-07393-JSC 8 Plaintiff,

9 v. ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE 10 MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE Re: Dkt. No. 224 11 NATATION, Defendant. 12

THOMAS A. SHIELDS, et al., 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. 15 FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE 16 NATATION, 17 Defendant.

18 Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ administrative motion to file under seal excerpts of the 19 parties’ further case management statement (the “Statement”). (Dkt. No. 224.) Plaintiffs seek to 20 file under seal information regarding Ms. Hosszú’s earnings from sponsorship arrangements, 21 certain swimmers’ earnings from their role as ISL “ambassadors,” and details regarding certain 22 swimmers’ profit-sharing arrangements with, or ownership interests in, certain ISL clubs. (Id. at 23 2.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiffs’ 24 motion to seal. 25 I. Legal Standard 26 There is a presumption of public access to judicial records and documents. Nixon v. 27 Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). Courts generally apply a “compelling 1 presumption in favor of access is the starting point.” Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 2 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotations and citations omitted). However, in the case 3 of non-dispositive motions and filings that are “only tangentially related[] to the underlying cause 4 of action” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1097 (9th Cir. 2016) 5 (citation omitted), the public has less need for access these documents. Therefore, parties moving 6 to seal them need only meet the lower “good cause” standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7 26(c). See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80; Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1101. The “good 8 cause” standard requires a “particularized” showing that “specific prejudice or harm will result if 9 the information is disclosed.” Cont’l Auto. Sys., Inc. v. Avanci, LLC, No. 19-CV-02520-LHK, 10 2019 WL 6612012, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2019) (citing Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. 11 Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002)). Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(b), sealing 12 is appropriate only where the requesting party “establishes that the document, or portions thereof 13 is . . . entitled to protection under the law,” or “sealable.” N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). 14 Plaintiffs seek to seal excerpts from the parties’ Statement. The Statement is discovery- 15 related; moreover, it is not substantively related to the case’s merits, see Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 16 F.3d at 1100-01, nor does it “affect [the] litigants’ substantive rights,” id. (internal quotation 17 marks and citation omitted). Therefore, the “good cause exception”—rather than the “presumptive 18 compelling reasons standard”—applies to Plaintiffs’ administrative motion to file under seal. Id. 19 at 1097 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Consequently, the Plaintiffs’ “private 20 interests . . . are the ‘only weights on the scale’” in sealing the requested material. Cont’l Auto. 21 Systems, 2019 WL 6612012, at *2 (quoting Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1097). 22 II. Discussion 23 The motion is narrowly tailored; its supporting declaration identifies specific excerpts of 24 the Statement containing information that Plaintiffs seek to seal. (Dkt. No. 224-1 at 2.) See N.D. 25 Cal. Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). Good cause exists to seal excerpts that cite or reference contractual 26 provisions regarding Plaintiffs’ profit-sharing arrangements with ISL clubs, as well as information 27 regarding certain swimmers’ earnings as ISL league “ambassadors,” because Plaintiffs have 1 arrangements—and the identities of swimmers with whom ISL has agreed to share profits—as 2 well as “ambassadorships” is disclosed. See Digital Reg of Texas, LLC v. Adobe Sys., Inc., No. C 3 12-1971 CW, 2014 WL 6986068, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2014) (finding “good cause” to grant 4 sealing motion where document contained information regarding “revenues, payments, technical 5 aspects of licensing agreements and unique material terms” because the information’s disclosure 6 would adversely affect the plaintiff’s future negotiations); see also Smith v. Keurig Green 7 Mountain, Inc., No. 18-CV-06690-HSG, 2020 WL 5630051, at *11 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 21, 2020) 8 (finding good cause to seal portions of documents that contained “confidential business and 9 proprietary information” related to a party’s operations). 10 However, Plaintiffs have not shown that good cause exists to seal the Statement’s response 11 to FINA’s argument regarding Messrs. Miller’s and Pebley’s testimony and their lack of “financial 12 incentives”—this excerpt contains no reference to any information regarding any Plaintiff’s 13 financial or personal information, nor does it reflect or reference any terms of a profit-sharing 14 arrangement whose disclosure would “specific[ally] prejudice or harm” Plaintiffs. (Dkt. No. 224-4 15 at 4.) Cont’l Auto. Systems, 2019 WL 6612012, at *1. Plaintiffs explain that disclosure of Ms. 16 Hosszú’s earnings from sponsorship arrangements would harm her in future negotiations with 17 potential sponsors, and as such the Court finds good cause exists to seal excerpts of the Statement 18 that reference these arrangements. (Dkt. No. 224-4 at 17-18.) See Digital Reg of Texas, 2014 WL 19 6986068, at *1. So too would disclosure of information regarding certain Plaintiffs’ ownership 20 interests in an ISL team harm ISL in future negotiations, and for this reason Plaintiffs have shown 21 good cause exists to seal excerpts of the Statement that reference or discuss these ownership 22 interests. (Dkt. No. 224-4 at 18-19.) See Digital Reg of Texas, 2014 WL 6986068, at *1. 23 CONCLUSION 24 For the reasons set forth above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiffs’ 25 administrative motion to file under seal. Plaintiffs shall file an unredacted version of the 26 Statement within 7 days of this Order. 27 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 || Dated: January 19, 2021 , ne 3 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORL 4 United States Magistrate Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

© 15 16

= 17

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