UNOPPOSED MOTION AND ORDER TO SEAL DOCUMENTS

THOMAS S. ZILLY, District Judge.

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule ("LCR") 5(g), Plaintiff Eko Brands, LLC ("Eko") is filing under seal certain documents supporting its opposition to Defendants Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises, Inc. and Adrian Rivera (together "ARM")'s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. 33). Certain Eko documents contain highly sensitive and nonpublic sales, cost, expense, profit, and projection data pertaining to Eko. (Legler Declaration Regarding Unopposed Motion to Seal "Legler" ¶ 2) Further, one such Eko document contains potentially sensitive information concerning market shares of not only Eko, but of other competitors as well. (Legler ¶ 2) Eko also has filed under seal certain documents that ARM has requested to remain under seal as well. (See Lowe Declaration Regarding Unopposed Motion to Seal "Lowe" ¶ 2) In accordance with LCR 5(g)(3)(A), Eko's counsel has conferred with ARM's counsel concerning the filing of the confidential exhibits under seal, and ARM's counsel has agreed to not oppose Eko's request to retain Eko's documents under seal. (See Lowe ¶¶ 3-4)

The Western District of Washington permits retaining under seal nonpublic information regarding litigants' sales, cost, profit, and market share data. For example, In Clearly Food & Beverage Co. v. Top Shelf Beverages, Inc., the court found good cause to seal confidential business information such as "confidential financial projections, marketing strategies, and business plans all of which could be used against [the party] by competitors." 102 F.Supp.3d 1154, 1178 (W.D. Wash. 2015). Also, the court in BitTitan, Inc. v, Skykick, Inc. granted the parties' motions to seal proprietary business information. 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181126 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 14, 2015) (holding that if released to the public, the information "has the potential to harm the parties' positions in the industry."); see also BitTitan, Inc. v. SkyKick, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180882 (W.D. Wash. July 29, 2015).

The same result should occur here. While there is a preference for open disclosure in the courts, if released to the public, Eko's documents regarding its highly sensitive and nonpublic sales, cost, expense, profit, and projection data would no doubt harm Eko's position in the market. (Legler 204b 2) Further, Eko's non-redacted Nielson report shows market share of not only Eko, but of its competitors as well. ARM has similarly claimed that certain of its documents contain confidential business information, and has requested that they likewise be filed under seal, specifically Exhibits G and J to Lowe's Declaration in Support of Eko's Opposition to ARM's Motion for Summary Judgment ("Lowe MSJ"). Eko has agreed to seek leave to file these under seal out of an abundance of caution. (Lowe ¶ 4)

Eko therefore respectfully requests that the following documents be filed and remain under seal:

ORDER

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5(g), the parties requested that the Court seal certain nonpublic confidential documents Eko has relied upon in its opposition to ARM's motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration, and good cause having been shown, this Court hereby directs the clerk to retain the requested documents under seal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.