Go Daddy Operating Company v. Ghaznavi, 17-cv-06545-PJH. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190225765
Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL Re: Dkt. No. 98 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON , District Judge . Before the court is defendants' motion to file portions of a joint motion to dismiss and a proposed order dismissing the action under seal. Dkt. 98. The general presumption in favor of public access to federal court records can be overcome only for compelling reasons when the motion at issue is more than tangentially related to the merits of a case. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC ,
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL Re: Dkt. No. 98 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON , District Judge . Before the court is defendants' motion to file portions of a joint motion to dismiss and a proposed order dismissing the action under seal. Dkt. 98. The general presumption in favor of public access to federal court records can be overcome only for compelling reasons when the motion at issue is more than tangentially related to the merits of a case. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC , 8..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
Re: Dkt. No. 98
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, District Judge.
Before the court is defendants' motion to file portions of a joint motion to dismiss and a proposed order dismissing the action under seal. Dkt. 98. The general presumption in favor of public access to federal court records can be overcome only for compelling reasons when the motion at issue is more than tangentially related to the merits of a case. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016). The motion at issue, which requests dismissal of the entire action, is core to the merits of the case, so defendants must provide compelling reasons to file associated materials under seal. Defendants have failed to do so. Defendants' motion to seal is accordingly DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
