Valeo Schalter und Sensoren GmbH v. NVIDIA Corporation

Opinion

1 2 3 7 8 VALEO SCHALTER UND SENSOREN Case No. 23-cv-05721-EKL (VKD) GMBH, 9 Plaintiff, ORDER SEALING DOCUMENTS 10 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 170, 174, 175, 176 11 NVIDIA CORPORATION, 12 Defendant.

13 14 On December 26, 2024, plaintiff Valeo Schalter und Sensoren GMBH (“Valeo”) filed four 15 administrative motions to consider whether NVIDIA Corporation’s (“NVIDIA”) materials should 16 be sealed in connection with four discovery dispute letters and attachments filed the same day. 17 Dkt. Nos. 170, 174, 175, 176. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(f), defendant NVIDIA filed a 18 declaration in support of Valeo’s sealing motions, but indicated that a narrower set of materials 19 requires sealing. Dkt. No. 178. 20 There is a strong presumption in favor of access by the public to judicial records and 21 documents accompanying dispositive motions that can be overcome only by a showing of 22 “compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of 23 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-79 (9th Cir. 2006) (cleaned up). However, the presumption does 24 not apply equally to a motion addressing matters that are only “tangentially related to the merits of 25 a case.” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016). A 26 party seeking to seal documents or information in connection with such a motion must meet the 27 lower “good cause” standard of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). Id. at 1098-99; Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1 defenses, so the Court applies the “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c). 2 NVIDIA asserts that the information it seeks to seal contains confidential business 3 information as well specific details regarding the technical aspects and personnel involved in 4 ongoing and forthcoming projects. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 178 ¶¶ 8-9, 14. NVIDIA states that this 5 information, if revealed, could cause damage to NVIDIA’s competitive standing and would 6 increase the risk that “bad actors” could “gain access to NVIDIA’s confidential technical 7 information.” Id. ¶¶ 10-11. The Court agrees that good cause exists to seal the information 8 NVIDIA has designated within these documents. The redactions proposed to the public versions 9 of these documents are minimal and narrowly tailored to address the concerns it identifies. See 10 Civil L.R. 79-5(c)(3). The following materials shall be sealed: 11 12 Document Portions to be Filed Under Seal 13 Discovery Letter Brief to Compel Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in NVIDIA to Produce Custodial ESI (Dkt. Exhibit A (Dkt. No. 178-1) to the Declaration of 14 No. 169) Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 15 Discovery Letter Brief re NVIDIA’s Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in 16 Failure to Produce Responsive Exhibit B (Dkt. No. 178-2) to the Declaration of Documents (Dkt. No. 171) Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 17 Exhibit 3 to Dkt. No. 171 Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in 18 Exhibit C (Dkt. No. 178-3) to the Declaration of Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 19 Exhibit 4 to Dkt. No. 171 Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in 20 Exhibit D (Dkt. No. 178-4) to the Declaration of 21 Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 22 Discovery Letter Brief to Compel Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in NVIDIA to Produce Financial Exhibit E (Dkt. No. 178-5) to the Declaration of 23 Documents (Dkt. No. 172) Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 24 Exhibit 2 to Dkt. No. 172 Entire Document 25 Discovery Letter Brief re NVIDIA’s Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in 26 Failure to Properly Prepare 30(b)(6) Exhibit F (Dkt. No. 178-6) to the Declaration of Witnesses (Dkt. No. 173) Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 27 9 Exhibit 2 to Dkt. No. 173 Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in Exhibit H (Dkt. No. 178-8) to the Declaration of 3 Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 4 Exhibit 3 to Dkt. No. 173 Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in Exhibit I (Dkt. No. 178-9) to the Declaration of 5 Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 6 Exhibit 4 to Dkt. No. 173 Portions of the document as redacted by NVIDIA in 7 Exhibit J (Dkt. No. 178-10) to the Declaration of Michael LaFond (Dkt. No. 178) 8 9 Redacted versions of these documents are available on the public docket. No further 10 action by the parties is required.

= 12 Dated: January 9, 2025

Virginia K. DeMarchi 2 15 United States Magistrate Judge 16

= 17

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