Filed: Nov. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL Re: Dkt. Nos. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374, 1434, 1437. JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY , Magistrate Judge . The parties in this action have sought to file voluminous information under seal, only a portion of which is properly sealable. This Order addresses the parties' Administrative Motions to File under Seal] at Docket Nos. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374,
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL Re: Dkt. Nos. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374, 1434, 1437. JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY , Magistrate Judge . The parties in this action have sought to file voluminous information under seal, only a portion of which is properly sealable. This Order addresses the parties' Administrative Motions to File under Seal] at Docket Nos. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374, ..
More
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
Re: Dkt. Nos. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374, 1434, 1437.
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY, Magistrate Judge.
The parties in this action have sought to file voluminous information under seal, only a portion of which is properly sealable. This Order addresses the parties' Administrative Motions to File under Seal] at Docket Nos. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374, 1434, and 1437. After carefully considering the parties' submissions, the motions to seal are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as set forth in the table below.
Civil Local Rule 79-5 requires that a party seeking sealing "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. Any request for sealing must be supported by a declaration "establishing that the document sought to be filed under seal, or portions thereof, are sealable." Civil L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). If the party filing the motion is not the party who designated the material at issue as confidential, then the designating party has four days to file a declaration in support of sealing or the motion to seal will be denied. Civil L.R. 79-5(e).
Dkt. No. Ruling
Dkt. No. 1237 Dkt. No. 1237-4 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because Plaintiff has failed
to show that the highlighted portion contains confidential
information.
Dkt. No. 1278 Dkt. No. 1278-4 The Court DENIES the motion to seal the highlighted portions
except as to the named companies on pages 2 and 3 and the
amount of the June 2015 valuation on page 4.
Dkt. No. 1278-6 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the highlighted portions of
the Deposition of Larry Page. The deposition would otherwise
reveal non-public information on Kitty Hawk's internal leadership,
research, and prototype development.
Dkt. No. 1278-7 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal Exhibits 3-5 in their
to Dkt. No. entirety because the exhibits discuss or refer to confidential details
1278-10 regarding the corporate ownership, corporate leadership, business
models, prototype development and testing, and employee
recruitment efforts of Kitty Hawk.
Dkt. No. 1278-12 The Court DENIES the motion to seal except as to the highlighted
portion at page 51, lines 17, 19-25; page 6, lines 1-12, 21-25; and
page 7, line 1, 5-14, 21-23.
Dkt. No. 1278-14 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the highlighted portions
except for references to Kitty Hawk, which is publicly known.
Dkt. No. 1278-16 The Court DENIES the motion to seal the highlighted portions
except as to page 3, lines 2-4,10-14; and page 5, lines 2, 9-10, 13-24.
Dkt. No. 1278-17 The Court DENIES the motion as to the date of the bonus and
GRANTS as to amount of the bonus.
Dkt. No. 1278-18 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the documents in their
entirety because the exhibits discuss, or refer to Waymo's
to Dkt. No. confidential business information, including internal Waymo
1278-20 documents describing its market analyses, plans, forecasts, and
financial information, as well as confidential valuations of
Waymo, disclosure of which could harm Waymo's competitive
standing.
Dkt. No. 1280 Dkt. No. 1280-3 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because the highlighted
portions do not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1291 Dkt. No. 1291-4 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because Plaintiff has not
sufficiently demonstrated that the highlighted portions contain
confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1291-6 The Court DENIES the motion to seal the highlighted
portions except as to page 8, lines 4-10; page 10, lines 17-25; and
page 11, lines 2-10, which discuss Waymo's confidential business
information, including internal valuations.
Dkt No. 13162 Dkt. No. 1395-2 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because the highlighted
portions do not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1395-4 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because the outlined
portions do not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1395-6 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because the highlighted
portions do not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1395-8 The Court DENIES the motion to seal as to the text of the email on
page 2. The Court GRANTS the motion to seal as to the
highlighted portions of the chart on pages 3-6 except as to the
second highlighted row because the chart discusses Waymo's
security measures and protocols and detailed computer forensics.
Dkt. No. 1395-10 The Court DENIES the motion to seal the highlighted portions
except for the name of the database on page 8.
Dkt. No. 1395-12 The Court DENIES the motion to seal the highlighted portions
except as to employee email addresses on pages 2-3.
Dkt. No. 1395-14 The Court DENIES the motion to seal except as to the highlighted
portion of ¶ 15 and the chart at ¶ 18, which discuss Waymo's
computer forensics and employee email addresses.
Dkt. No. 1395-16 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because the highlighted
portions do not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1395-20 The Court DENIES the motion to seal except as to the highlighted
portion of ¶ 15 and the chart of ¶ 18, which discuss Waymo's
computer forensics and employee email addresses.
Dkt. No. 1395-22 The Court DENIES the motion to seal the highlighted portions
except as to the employee email addresses and the URL address.
Dkt. No. 1395-28 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the highlighted portions
because the redactions are narrowly tailored to information
regarding Google's computer forensics.
Dkt. No. 1328 Dkt. No. 1328 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because
Defendants did not file a supporting declaration.
Dkt. No. 13523 Dkt. No. 1404-2 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the outlined boxes because
they contain information related to the timeline of Uber's LiDAR
sensors.
Dkt. No. 1404-4 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the outlined boxes except
as to pages 10, 11, and 12 lines 6-9 because the portions are
narrowly tailored to the technology's commercialization schedule.
Dkt. No. 1354 Dkt. No. 1354 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because
Defendants did not file a supporting declaration.
Dkt. No. 1367 Dkt. No. 1367-10 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal except as to rows 15 and
19. The sealed portions are narrowly tailored to descriptions of
internal Google security tools used to detect and investigate
wrongdoing.
Dkt. No. 1367-13 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the exhibit in its entirety,
which contains investigative steps taken by Google's security
engineers.
Dkt. No. 1367-15 The Court DENIES the motion to seal because the highlighted
portions do not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1367-16 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the document in its entirety
because the document is from Google's internal, Google-only
intranet server and contains Waymo's highly confidential business
strategy and planning.
Dkt. No. 1374 Dkt. No. 1374-4 The Court DENIES the motion except as to the highlighted
portions at the bottom of page 4, which discuss Uber's
autonomous vehicle commercialization schedule.
Dkt. No. 1374-6 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because
Defendants have not sufficiently demonstrated that the highlighted
portions contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1374-8 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
highlighted portion does not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434 Dkt. No. 1434-4 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
highlighted portion does not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434-6 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
parties have failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the exhibit
contains confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434-8 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
parties have failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the exhibit
contains confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434-10 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
(1471-4) highlighted portion does not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434-12 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
exhibit does not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434-14 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
(1471-4) parties have failed to demonstrate that the highlighted portions
contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1434-16 The Court GRANTS the motion to file under seal because the
(1471-6) redactions are narrowly tailored to employee email addresses.
Dkt. No. 1434-18 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal except as to the
(1471-8) URL links on page 2.
Dkt. No. 14374 Dkt. No. 1437-3 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
highlighted portion does not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1437-5 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
highlighted portion does not contain confidential information.
Dkt. No. 1437-9 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal except as to the
URL addresses on pages 3 and 7.
Dkt. No. 1437-10 The Court GRANTS the motion to seal the highlighted portions,
/Dkt. No. which are narrowly tailored to email addresses and phone numbers
1472-2 of Waymo employees.
Dkt. No. 1437-11 The Court DENIES the motion to file under seal because the
/Dkt. No. highlighted portion does not contain confidential information.
1472-4
This Order disposes of Docket No. 1237, 1278, 1280, 1291, 1316, 1328, 1352, 1354, 1367, 1374, 1434, and 1437.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
