Filed: Jul. 23, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 23, 2018
Summary: ORDER C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court are defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White's motions for leave to file exhibits under seal (ECF Nos. 114, 129), filed on March 23, 2018, and April 20, 2018, respectively. Defendants request that various exhibits in support of their pending motion to dismiss be sealed because they are subject to confidentiality agreements. Generally, the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of
Summary: ORDER C.W. HOFFMAN, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Presently before the court are defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White's motions for leave to file exhibits under seal (ECF Nos. 114, 129), filed on March 23, 2018, and April 20, 2018, respectively. Defendants request that various exhibits in support of their pending motion to dismiss be sealed because they are subject to confidentiality agreements. Generally, the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of ..
More
ORDER
C.W. HOFFMAN, JR., Magistrate Judge.
Presently before the court are defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White's motions for leave to file exhibits under seal (ECF Nos. 114, 129), filed on March 23, 2018, and April 20, 2018, respectively. Defendants request that various exhibits in support of their pending motion to dismiss be sealed because they are subject to confidentiality agreements.
Generally, the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Such records are presumptively publicly accessible. Id. Consequently, a party seeking to seal a judicial record "bears the burden of overcoming this strong presumption." Id. In the case of dispositive motions, the party seeking to seal the record "must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure, such as the public interest in understanding the judicial process." Id. at 1178-79 (alteration and internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Among the compelling reasons which may justify sealing a record are "when such court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes, such as the use of records to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade secrets." Id. at 1179 (quotation omitted). However, avoiding a litigant's "embarrassment, incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not, without more, compel the court to seal its records." Id.
In this case, while the court previously has sealed certain documents and discovery is proceeding pursuant to a protective order, defendants are now asking to seal documents related to a case-dispositive motion. Given that defendants do not articulate compelling reasons to do so, the court will deny their motions to seal without prejudice.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED defendants Zuffa, LLC and Mark White's motions for leave to file exhibits under seal (ECF Nos. 114, 129) are DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court must maintain the exhibits at issue in ECF No. 114 and No. 129 under seal for 14 days from the date of this order.
