ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SEAL

RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to seal. Dkt. # 9. Defendant does not oppose the motion.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) permits parties to file documents under seal. Local Rule 5(g) supplements the federal rule, requiring parties filing documents under seal to support their filing by motion. W.D. Wash. LCR 5(g)(2)(B). Documents submitted for consideration remain under seal until the court makes its determination. Id.

Allowing parties to file court documents under seal is an exception to the general rule that the public should have a "right to inspect and copy public records and documents[.]" Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978)). Parties seeking to shield portions of court filings from public inspection must provide "compelling reasons" for sealing that outweigh the public's interest in understanding all aspects of the judicial process. Id. at 1178-79. Courts must base any decision to seal documents on a compelling reason without relying on hypothesis or conjecture. Id. at 1179. One such compelling reason is the protection of "business information that might harm a litigant's competitive standing." Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598.

Having reviewed the record, the Court finds that Plaintiff, procedurally and substantively, made the proper showing to support the partial sealing of documents. The Court finds Plaintiff's argument compelling: unsealing documents containing sensitive business information has the potential to harm Plaintiff's competitive standing. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to seal.