Troyer v. The Yerba Mate Co., LLP

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8

10 CASEY TROYER, 11 Plaintiff, No. 20-06065-WHA

12 v.

13 THE YERBA MATE CO., LLC, and ORDER DENYING MOTION TO GUAYAKI SUSTAINABLE FILE CERTAIN MATERAILS 14 RAINFOREST PRODUCTS, INC., UNDER SEAL 15 Defendants.

16 17 Plaintiff has moved to file under seal two exhibits in support of his motion for class 18 certification. 19 There is generally “a strong presumption in favor of access” to court records and 20 documents. Kamakana v. City and Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). “A 21 party seeking to seal a judicial record then bears the burden of overcoming this strong 22 presumption by meeting the compelling reasons standard. That is, the party must articulate 23 compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of 24 access and the public policies favoring disclosure.” Id. at 1178–79 (cleaned up). 25 A classic example of a compelling reason is “business information that might harm a 26 litigant’s competitive standing.” Ctr. For Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1096– 27 97 (9th Cir. 2016) (citations omitted). 1 Here, plaintiff seeks to file under seal electronic records in the form of spreadsheets 2 containing (1) lists of invoices and (2) records from an application he used in his work which 3 tracked his location and use of the app along with the associated customer information. 4 In support of sealing, plaintiff states only (Dkt. No. 50-1 at { 3): 5 Exhibits DD and EE consist of electronic data that [defendants] presumably consider trade secrets. The documents were marked 6 by Defendants as confidential pursuant to the Protective Order (DE 42). The declaration of [plaintiff's expert] restates some of the 7 information contained within Exhibits DD and EE, namely, customer names and locations. This does not suffice. If customer names and locations is “business information that 9 might harm a litigant’s competitive standing,” which is doubtful, then only those portions of 10 the records should be sealed. Plaintiff seeks to seal the entire spreadsheets, of which only 11 small portions are customer names and locations. 12 Therefore, the motion is DENIED. 13

O IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: May 12, 2021 = 17

oe We PRlee 19 WILLIAM ALSUP 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28