ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.

After a settlement between the Volkswagen defendants and the opt-out plaintiffs represented by Heygood, Orr & Pearson, the Court denied as moot several motions that these plaintiffs had filed. (See Dkt. No. 6677.) In these motions, plaintiffs had requested orders authorizing alternative service of process on Volkswagen AG.

Still outstanding is plaintiffs' motion to seal (i) certain exhibits that they attached to one of their alternative-service-of-process motions, and (ii) quotes and summaries of those exhibits in the motion. Plaintiffs request that this information be sealed because it was marked as confidential by the Volkswagen defendants. (See Dkt. No. 4171 at 2.)

In a declaration submitted in response to plaintiffs' motion to seal, counsel for the Volkswagen defendants requests that the Court permit a narrower set of redactions, covering only the names of certain nonparties who are identified in one of the exhibits, and the home address of one of these nonparties. With those redactions, the Volkswagen defendants do not object to the exhibits being filed publicly. (See Dkt. No. 4187 ¶ 3.)

The Court has previously held that redacting nonparties' names and personal information is supported by a compelling reason: disclosure of such information can infringe on nonparties' privacy rights. (See Dkt. Nos. 1767, 2059, 4049, 5223, 6207.) Consistent with those prior Orders, the Court will permit the redactions requested by the Volkswagen defendants. All other information in and attached to the alternative-service-of-process motion at issue shall be publicly filed by plaintiffs, by Friday, November 22, 2019.

IT IS SO ORDERED.