Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

WHITTINGTON HOLDINGS 1 LLC v. WESTERFIELD, 2:15-cv-00316-RFB-PAL. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20160830d61 Visitors: 1
Filed: Aug. 26, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 26, 2016
Summary: ORDER (Mot. File Under Seal — ECF No. 59) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the Motion for Leave to File Under Seal (ECF No. 59), filed July 29, 2016, by Defendants Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("Chase"). This Motion is referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and LR IB 1-3 of the Local Rules of Practice. The court has considered the Motion. No response was filed and the dead
More

ORDER

(Mot. File Under Seal — ECF No. 59)

This matter is before the court on the Motion for Leave to File Under Seal (ECF No. 59), filed July 29, 2016, by Defendants Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("Chase"). This Motion is referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and LR IB 1-3 of the Local Rules of Practice. The court has considered the Motion. No response was filed and the deadline for doing so has now passed.

The Motion seeks leave to file under seal certain exhibits containing contracts, proprietary business information, and commercially sensitive documents. See Sealed Exhibits (ECF No. 61) (attaching copies of certain master agreements between Freddie Mac and Chase). This is a foreclosure action and the court has entered a Stipulated Protective Order (ECF No. 46) governing documentation that is confidential to Defendants internal business strategies and other confidential information of a proprietary business or commercial nature. Defendants argue that the information in the Sealed Exhibits is extremely sensitive given Freddie Mac's significant role in the secondary mortgage market and if such information was publicly disclosed, will most certainly have a detrimental impact on Freddie Mac's mortgage business and the secondary mortgage market in general.

Having reviewed and considered the matter in accordance with the Ninth Circuit's directives set forth in Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006), the court finds that Defendants have met their burden of establishing compelling reasons for these documents to remain sealed.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED: that Defendants' Motion For Leave to File Under Seal (ECF No. 59) is GRANTED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer