Filed: Aug. 11, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 11, 2015
Summary: ORDER RE ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL Re: Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 120, 128, 142, 177, 196, 227, and 232 JAMES DONATO , District Judge . This order addresses the pending administrative motions to seal in this case. Of the currently-pending motions, the ones at Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 120, and 142 are moot in light of the Court's prior order at Dkt. No. 155, after which defendants filed a notice that they were no longer seeking to seal some of the documents that were subjects of the ear
Summary: ORDER RE ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL Re: Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 120, 128, 142, 177, 196, 227, and 232 JAMES DONATO , District Judge . This order addresses the pending administrative motions to seal in this case. Of the currently-pending motions, the ones at Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 120, and 142 are moot in light of the Court's prior order at Dkt. No. 155, after which defendants filed a notice that they were no longer seeking to seal some of the documents that were subjects of the earl..
More
ORDER RE ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL
Re: Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 120, 128, 142, 177, 196, 227, and 232
JAMES DONATO, District Judge.
This order addresses the pending administrative motions to seal in this case. Of the currently-pending motions, the ones at Dkt. Nos. 101, 106, 120, and 142 are moot in light of the Court's prior order at Dkt. No. 155, after which defendants filed a notice that they were no longer seeking to seal some of the documents that were subjects of the earlier motions, see Dkt. No. 165, and filed a new administrative motion to seal at Dkt. No. 177. In addition, the administrative motion to seal at Dkt. No. 128 is essentially moot, because it seeks to seal a subset of the documents covered by Dkt. No. 142. Finally, the motion at Dkt. No. 227 is also moot because defendants have filed a statement agreeing to de-designate essentially all the material as confidential, apart from a single exhibit that has been re-redacted consistent with the Court's prior orders. See Dkt. Nos. 238, 238-1. The Court strikes those motions, and in this order rules on the motions at Dkt. Nos. 177, 196, and 232.
I. GOVERNING STANDARD
In our circuit, in evaluating a motion to seal, two different standards apply depending on whether the request is being made in connection with a dispositive motion or a non-dispositive motion.
For dispositive motions, the historic, "strong presumption of access to judicial records" fully applies, and a party seeking sealing must establish "compelling reasons" to overcome that presumption. Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-80 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003)). This standard presents a "high threshold," and "a `good cause' showing will not, without more, satisfy" it. Id. at 1180 (citations omitted). When ordering sealing in this context, the district court must also "articulate the rationale underlying its decision to seal." Apple Inc. v. Psystar Corp., 658 F.3d 1150, 1162 (9th Cir. 2011).
The non-dispositive motion context is different. There, "the usual presumption of the public's right of access is rebutted," the "public has less of a need for access to court records attached only to non-dispositive motions," and the "public policies that support the right of access to dispositive motions, and related materials, do not apply with equal force to non-dispositive materials." Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80 (citations omitted). Therefore, in that context, materials may be sealed so long as the party seeking sealing makes a "particularized showing" under the "good cause" standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). Id. at 1180 (quoting Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1138). In either case, however, "[a]n unsupported assertion of `unfair advantage' to competitors without explaining `how a competitor would use th[e] information to obtain an unfair advantage' is insufficient." Hodges v. Apple, Inc., No. 13-cv-01128-WHO, 2013 WL 6070408, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2013) (quoting Dunbar v. Google, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-003305-LHK, 2012 WL 6202719, at *4-5 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 2013)).
In our district, in addition to meeting the applicable standard under Kamakana, all parties requesting sealing must also comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5, including that rule's requirement that the request must "establish[] that the document, or portions thereof, are privileged, protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the law," i.e., is "sealable." Civil L.R. 79-5(b). The sealing request must also "be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material." Id.
II. DISCUSSION
The disputed portions of the motion at Dkt. No. 180, as well as the motions at Dkt. Nos. 196, 227, and 232 involve documents filed in connection with a motion for summary judgment. Since motions for summary judgment are dispositive, the "compelling reasons" standard applies.
Applying this standard, the Court rules on the requests to seal as follows. In each case where a request is denied, personally identifiable information of individuals may be redacted.
A. Dkt. No. 177
Tab Exact Portions to be Defendants' Reason for Sealing Grant or Denial of
Sealed Request
Exhibit G to Smith's Opposition to Granted.
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification (Dkt. No. 106). Exhibit G
is the VES Crew Rules and Regulations
and includes the name of a Smith
employee. This individual is not a party
to this lawsuit and has not consented to
the public disclosure of her employment
information. This document further
contains the personal telephone number
of Michael Smith, who has not
consented to the disclosure of this
information. See Smith Declaration, ¶ 5.
This Court previously sealed this
Individual names and material in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt.
1 phone numbers No. 155).
Exhibit A to Plaintiffs' Reply in Granted.
Support of their Motion for Class
Certification (Guadalupe Ortega
Deposition Transcript) (Dkt. No. 120).
This portion of the Guadalupe Ortega
deposition transcript includes the name
of an individual who is not a party to
this lawsuit and has not consented to the
public disclosure of her employment
information. See Smith Declaration, ¶ 5.
This Court previously sealed this
material in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt.
2 Name at 139:18, 23 No. 155).
Exhibit P to the McRee Declaration Denied.
(McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards) (Dkt. No.
142). This Exhibit is McDonald's
USA's National Franchising Standards,
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
6 Entire Document competitors a detailed and firsthand
Tab Exact Portions to be Defendants' Reason for Sealing Grant or Denial of
Sealed Request
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
Denied. A prior
version of the entire
document from
which this exhibit is
drawn has been
filed in the public
record in the
Eastern District of
Michigan, and
defendants provide
no reason why the
Exhibit Q to the McRee Declaration disclosure of this
(Full Operations Review) (Dkt. No. version would
142). This Exhibit is the Full Operations inflict additional
Review portion of the QSC Playbook. competitive harm.
Disclosure of the information contained See Wilson v.
in this document would provide McDonald's Corp.,
competitors of the McDonald's No. 5:14-cv-11082-JCO-MJH
Defendants a strategic and unfair (E.D.
business advantage by allowing Mich. filed Mar.
competitors a detailed and firsthand 24, 2014), Dkt. 11-6;
account of the key business strategies Pullen v.
and profit-driving factors considered McDonald's Corp.,
and offered as optional guidance No. 5:14-cv-11081-JCO-MJH
exclusively to franchisees of (E.D.
McDonald's USA during the interactive Mich. filed Mar.
business review process. See Vaghani 24, 2014), Dkt. 12-10.
7 Entire Document Declaration, ¶ 6.
B. Dkt. No. 196
Tab Exact Portions to be Defendants' Reason for Sealing Grant or Denial of
Sealed Request
1 3:18-6:7; 13:1-7: 20:13-16; Plaintiffs' Opposition to the Denied. The
FB34; 21:7-21 McDonald's Defendants Motion for portions the
Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 183). McDonald's
This portion of Plaintiffs' Opposition defendants seek are
cites to and describes in detail the file under seal are
contents of McDonald's USA's necessary to
Franchising Standards and internal understand the
business review proces, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the resolution of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and issues raised in
unfair business advantage by allowing their motion, and
competitors a detailed and firsthand they have not
account of the key business strategies shown a concrete
and profit-driving factors considered likelihood of
and offered as optional guidance competitive harm
exclusively to franchisees of from disclosure of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani the specific
Declaration, ¶ 8. portions that they
seek to file under
seal.
2 3:13-25; 6:17-7:7; 7:14-8:3; Declaration of John Gordon in Denied.
FN 16; 13:13-23; FN Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to
26 the McDonald's Defendants Motion
for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No.
190). This portion of the Gordon
Declaration cites to and describes in
detail the contents of McDonald's
USA's National Franchising Standards,
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 8.
3 Portions directly citing to Chart of Business Review Documents Denied.
Business Review (Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Reports, Recap Letters Carlina Perna). Exhibit A to the Perna
and Operations Reviews. Declaration cites directly to Exhibits 49,
50, 51, 52, 53, 143 to the Pitts
Declaration and Exhibits 122 and 123 to
the Perna Declaration. This information
contains specific on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
4 Entire Document. Full Operations Review Report Denied.
(Exhibit B to the Declaration of
Carlina Perna). Exhibit B contains
specific information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
5 Entire Document. ROIP Performance Matrix — QSCP Denied.
List, Full and Short Operations
Review Reports (Exhibit 122 to the
Declaration of Carlina Perna). Exhibit
122 contains specific information on
Smith business operations and suggested
guidance from McDonald's USA on
how to maximize profits. Disclosure of
this document would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
6 Entire Document. QSCP Matrix, Full and Short Denied.
Operations Review Reports (Exhibit
123 to the Declaration of Carlina
Perna). Exhibit 123 contains specific
information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
7 139:18; 139:23 Portions of Deposition Transcript of Granted.
Guadalupe Ortega (Exhibit B to the
Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
portion of the Guadalupe Ortega
deposition transcript includes the name
of an individual who is not a party to
this lawsuit and has not consented to the
public disclosure of her employment
information. See Smith Declaration, ¶ 5.
This Court previously sealed this
material in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt.
No. 155).
8 161:15-21; 164:7-11; Portions of Deposition Transcript of Denied.
168:1-25; 170:1-25; Bruce Steinhilper (Exhibit C to the
172:17-21 Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
portion of the Steinhilper transcript cites
to and describes in detail the contents of
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 7.
9 103:4-104:22; 115:1-116:22; Portions of the Deposition Transcript Denied.
124:11-22; of Daniel Gehret (Exhibit H to the
133:3-22 Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
portion of the Gehret transcript cites to
and describes in detail the contents of
McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 7.
10 90:22-91:6; 99:7-16; Portions of the Deposition Transcript Denied.
103:2-8; 103:22-24; of Ed Smith (Exhibit I to the
132:18-24 Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
portion of the Smith transcript cites to
and describes in detail the contents of
McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 7.
11 Response to Special Smith Family Partnership Responses Granted.
Interrogatory No. 2 to Plaintiff Ernestina Sandoval's
(2:19-2:26, 3:4-5:20); Special Interrogatories, Set One
Response to Special (Exhibit J to the Declaration of Casey
Interrogatory No. 10 Pitts). These portions of the Smith
(10:10-18; 10:20-13:7; Interrogatory Responses list the names
13:14-13:17); Exhibit A of Smith and McDonald's employees.
(only with respect to the These individuals are not parties to this
names and employee lawsuit and have not consented to the
number columns). public disclosure of their personal
information related to their employment.
See Smith Declaration, ¶ 5. This Court
previously sealed this material in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
12 Employee names and Time Punch Change Approval Report Granted.
employee ID numbers. (Exhibit 22 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 22 includes the
names and employee ID numbers of
Smith employees. These individuals
have not consented to the public
disclosure of this information. See
Smith Declaration, ¶ 5. This Court
previously sealed this material in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
13 Employee names and Daily Crew Schedule report (Exhibit Granted.
employee ID numbers. 47 to the Declaration of Casey Pitts).
Exhibit 47 includes the names and
employee ID numbers of Smith
employees. These individuals have not
consented to the public disclosure of this
information. See Smith Declaration, ¶
5. This Court previously sealed this
material in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt.
No. 155).
14 Entire Document. Business Review Report (Exhibit 49 Denied. Although
to the Declaration of Casey Pitts). the Court
Exhibit 49 is a Business Review Report previously held that
containing specifics on Smith business there was good
operations and suggested guidance from cause to seal similar
McDonald's USA as how to maximize documents, the
profits. Disclosure of the information Court finds that
contained in this document would they are not
provide competitors of the McDonald's sealable under the
Defendants a strategic and unfair more stringent
business advantage by allowing standard applicable
competitors a detailed and firsthand to requests to seal
account of the key business strategies associated with
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of dispositive motions.
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Reports in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
15 Contents of letter. Business Review Report Recap Letter Denied.
(Exhibit 50 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 50 is a
communication between McDonald's
USA and Smith contains specifics on
Smith business operations and suggested
guidance from McDonald's USA as
how to maximize profits. Disclosure of
the information contained in this
document would provide competitors of
the McDonald's Defendants a strategic
and unfair business advantage by
allowing competitors a detailed and
firsthand account of the key business
strategies and profit-driving factors
considered and offered as optional
guidance exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Recap Letters
in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No.
155).
16 Entire Document. Business Review Report (Exhibit 51 Denied.
to the Declaration of Casey Pitts).
Exhibit 51 is a Business Review Report
containing specifics on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA as how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Reports in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
17 Entire Document. Business Review Report (Exhibit 52 Denied.
to the Declaration of Casey Pitts).
Exhibit 52 is a Business Review Report
containing specifics on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA as how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Reports in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
18 Contents of letter. Business Review Report Recap Letter Denied.
(Exhibit 53 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 53 is a
communication between McDonald's
USA and Smith contains specifics on
Smith business operations and suggested
guidance from McDonald's USA as
how to maximize profits. Disclosure of
the information contained in this
document would provide competitors of
the McDonald's Defendants a strategic
and unfair business advantage by
allowing competitors a detailed and
firsthand account of the key business
strategies and profit-driving factors
considered and offered as optional
guidance exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Recap Letters
in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No.
155).
19 Data in report. Labor Analysis Summary Report Granted as to the
(Exhibit 69 to the Declaration of specific numbers,
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 69 includes but otherwise
specific financial data, including sales denied.
information. This infomation is not
publicly avaiable and could not be
recreated from public avaiable
sources. See Smith Declaration, ¶ 6.
20. Data in report. Daily Activity Report (Exhibit 71 to Granted, except as
the Declaration of Casey Pitts). to the First bullet
Exhibit 71 includes specific financial point.
data includes sales information See
Smith Declaration ¶ 6. This Court
previously sealed this material in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
21 Entire Document QSC PlayBook (Exhibit 106 to the Denied.
Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
Exhibit is Version 7.0 of the QSC
Playbook. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
22 Entire Document National Franchising Standards Denied.
(Exhibit 107 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). This Exhibit is
McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
23 Entire Document. National Franchising Standards Denied.
(Exhibit 109 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts; Exhibit 3 to the
Declaration of John Gordon). This
Exhibit is McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
24 Entire Document. Improvement Process for Denied.
Underperforming Restaurants &
Related Documents (Exhibit 112 to
the Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
Exhibit includes specific details
regarding McDonald's USA's
Improvement Process for
Underperforming Restaurants,
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
25 Employee names and Time Punch Change Approval Report Granted.
employee ID numbers. (Exhibit 129 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 129 includes the
names and employee ID numbers of
Smith employees. These individuals
have not consented to the public
disclosure of this information. See
Smith Declaration, ¶ 5. This Court
previously sealed this material in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
26 Employee names and Time Punch Change Approval Report Granted.
employee ID numbers. (Exhibit 130 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 130 includes the
names and employee ID numbers of
Smith employees. These individuals
have not consented to the public
disclosure of this information. See
Smith Declaration, ¶ 5. This Court
previously sealed this material in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
27 Sales data and employee Focus on Service Daily Report Granted.
names. (Exhibit 131 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 131 describes in
detail confidential Smith business
records and data related to the daily
operations of the restaurant as well as
employee names. These individuals are
not parties to this action and have not
consented to the public disclosure of this
information. The information sought to
be sealed is not available to the public
and could not be recreated from publicly
available sources. This confidential
report contains detailed sales data and
related information regarding the daily
operations of a Smith restaurant. The
information in this report (e.g., sales
data, order data, transaction time, etc.),
has commercial value to competitors
and would provide them with an unfair
business advantage. See Smith
Declaration, ¶ 6.
28 Entire Document. Visit Preparation Report (Exhibit 142 Denied.
to the Declaration of Casey Pitts).
Exhibit 142 contains specific
information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
29 Entire Document. Full Operations Review Report Denied.
(Exhibit 143 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 143 contains
specific information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
30 Entire Report. Full Operations Review Report Denied.
(Exhibit 144 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 144 contains
specific information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
31 Entire Report. Action Plan Report (Exhibit 145 to Denied.
the Declaration of Casey Pitts).
Exhibit 145 contains specific
information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process. See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 7.
32 Sales data. Crew Size Planning Matrix (Exhibit Granted.
206 to the Declaration of Casey Pitts).
Exhibit 206 describes in detail
confidential Smith business records and
data related to the daily operations of
the restaurant. The information sought
to be sealed is not available to the public
and could not be recreated from publicly
available sources. This confidential
report contains detailed sales data and
related information regarding the daily
operations of a Smith restaurant. The
information in this report (e.g., sales
data, order data, transaction time, etc.),
has commercial value to competitors
and would provide them with an unfair
business advantage. See Smith
Declaration, ¶ 6.
33 Employee names and Spreadsheet of LMS Completion Date Granted.
employee ID numbers. by Employee (Exhibit 243 to the
Declaration of Casey Pitts). Exhibit
243 includes the names and employee
ID numbers of Smith employees. These
individuals have not consented to the
public disclosure of this information.
See Smith Declaration, ¶ 5. This Court
previously sealed this material in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
34 Contents of email. Email from J. Watt to S. Dubois Denied.
(Exhibit 265 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 265 is an internal
email between McDonald's employees
and U.S. owner-operators. The contents
of this email contain information related
to resources offered to franchisees, such
as Smith, in the context of employee
engagement, including sensitive
information regarding McDonald's
strategies in response to employee
engagement. See Vaghani Declaration, ¶
6.
35 Contents of email and Email from E. DeLuna to Owner-Operators Denied.
attachments. (Exhibit 266 to the
Declaration of Casey Pitts). Exhibit
265 is an internal email between a
McDonald's employee and U.S. owner-operators.
The contents of this email
contain information related to resources
offered to franchisees, such as Smith, in
the context of employee engagement,
including sensitive information
regarding McDonald's strategies in
response to employee engagement. See
Vaghani Declaration, ¶ 6.
36 Consents of letter. Business Review Report Recap Letter Denied.
(Exhibit 296 to the Declaration of
Casey Pitts). Exhibit 296 is a
communication between McDonald's
USA and Smith contains specifics on
Smith business operations and suggested
guidance from McDonald's USA as
how to maximize profits. Disclosure of
the information contained in this
document would provide competitors of
the McDonald's Defendants a strategic
and unfair business advantage by
allowing competitors a detailed and
firsthand account of the key business
strategies and profit-driving factors
considered and offered as optional
guidance exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Recap Letters
in its June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No.
155).
37 Entire Document. National Restaurant Building and Denied.
Equipment Standards for Traditional
Restaurants FAQs (Exhibit 324 to the
Pitts Declaration). This Exhibit
includes specific details regarding the
National Restaurant Building and
Equipment Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
38 Entire Document. National Restaurant Building and Denied.
Equipment Standards for Traditional
Restaurants (Exhibit 325 to the
Declaration of Casey Pitts). This
Exhibit includes specific details
regarding the National Restaurant
Building and Equipment Standards,
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
39 Entire Document. National Franchising Standards Denied.
FAQs (Exhibit 344 to the Declaration
of Casey Pitts). This Exhibit includes
specific details regarding McDonald's
USA's National Franchising Standards,
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
C. Dkt. No. 227
Although defendants filed a statement of non-opposition at Dkt. No. 238 agreeing that Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Miscalculated Wages and Daily Overtime Violations and Derivative Claims and Exhibits A, B, D, 310, and 311 to the Declaration of Abigail E. Shafroth in Support of the Motion, can be filed in the public record, it appears that unredacted versions have not been filed in the public record. The parties are directed to file unredacted versions of these documents within 7 days of this order.
D. Dkt. No. 232
Tab Exact Portions to be Defendants' Reason for Sealing Grant or Denial of
Sealed Request
1 4:11-18 McDonald's Defendants Reply Brief Denied.
in Support of Motion for Summary
Judgment. This portion of the
McDonald's Defendants' Reply cites to
and describes in detail the contents of
McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards and internal
business review process, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 8.
2 216:8-13; 216:23-217:13 Portions of Deposition Transcript of Denied.
Steve Dubois (Exhibit H to the
Declaration of Elizabeth B. McRee).
This portion of the Steve Dubois
transcript cites to and describes in detail
the contents of optional advice offered
by McDonald's USA to Smith during
the operations review process,
disclosure of which would provide
competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 7.
3 Entire Document Exhibit 49 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (Business Review
Report — February 27, 2012). Exhibit
49 is a Business Review Report
containing specifics on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA as how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Reports in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
4 Entire Document Exhibit 51 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (Business Review
Report — April 28, 2010). Exhibit 51 is
a Business Review Report containing
specifics on Smith business operations
and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA as how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Reports in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
5 Entire Document Exhibit 52 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (Business Review
Report — January 22, 2014). Exhibit 52
is a Business Review Report containing
specifics on Smith business operations
and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA as how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6. This Court previously
sealed Business Review Reports in its
June 5, 2015 Order. (Dkt. No. 155).
6 McDonald's USA's Exhibit 106 to the Declaration of Denied.
internal business Elizabeth B. McRee (QSC PlayBook).
strategies Exhibit 106 is Version 7.0 of the QSC
Playbook. Disclosure of the information
contained in this document would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
business review process. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
7 Entire Document Exhibit 107 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (National
Franchising Standards). Exhibit 107
is McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
8 Entire Document Exhibit 109 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (National
Franchising Standards). Exhibit 109 is
McDonald's USA's National
Franchising Standards, disclosure of
which would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA. See Vaghani
Declaration, ¶ 6.
9 Entire Document. Exhibit 122 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (ROIP
Performance Matrix — QSCP List,
Full and Short Operations Review
Reports). Exhibit 122 contains specific
information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 6.
10 Entire Document Exhibit 123 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (QSCP Matrix,
Full and Short Operations Review
Reports). Exhibit 123 contains
specific information on Smith business
operations and suggested guidance from
McDonald's USA on how to maximize
profits. Disclosure of this document
would provide competitors of the
McDonald's Defendants a strategic and
unfair business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as optional guidance
exclusively to franchisees of
McDonald's USA during the interactive
operations review process See Vaghani
Declaration ¶ 6.
11 Entire Document Exhibit 325 to the Declaration of Denied.
Elizabeth B. McRee (National
Restaurant Building and Equipment
Standards for Traditional
Restaurants). Exhibit 325 includes
specific details regarding the National
Restaurant Building and Equipment
Standards, disclosure of which would
provide competitors of the McDonald's
Defendants a strategic and unfair
business advantage by allowing
competitors a detailed and firsthand
account of the key business strategies
and profit-driving factors considered
and offered as guidance exclusively to
franchisees of McDonald's USA. See
Vaghani Declaration, ¶ 6.
III. CONCLUSION
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(f), the parties must file revised documents comporting with this order within 7 days if they wish the Court to consider the documents sought to be sealed. In addition, the Court requests that the parties jointly lodge binders of Plaintiffs' Response to the McDonald's Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, see Dkt. No. 183, and the McDonald's Defendants' Reply, see Dkt. No. 229, including unredacted copies of any associated declarations and exhibits.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
