# Calhoun v. Google LLC > District Court, N.D. California · November 23, 2021 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10069715 ## Case - **Court:** District Court, N.D. California - **Decided:** November 23, 2021 - **Opinion:** 100trialcourt - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10069715 ## Opinion text 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PATRICK CALHOUN, et al., Case No. 20-cv-05146-LHK (SVK) 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE 9 v. MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL 10 GOOGLE LLC, Re: Dkt. Nos. 350, 379, 384, 385 11 Defendant. 12 Before the Court are several administrative motions to file under seal materials associated 13 with discovery disputes in this case. Dkt. 350, 379, 384, 385. 14 Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, 15 including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 16 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 17 (1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of 18 access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 19 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party 20 seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the 21 underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For 22 Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to 23 motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower 24 “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party 25 moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local 26 Rule 79-5. 27 1 Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information the parties seek to seal 2 was submitted to the Court in connection with discovery-related motions, rather than a motion that 3 concerns the merits of the case. The Court may reach different conclusions regarding sealing 4 these documents under different standards or in a different context. Having considered the 5 motions to seal, supporting declarations, and the pleadings on file, and good cause appearing, the 6 Court ORDERS as follows: 7 1. Dkt. 350 8 Court’s Ruling 9 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling Sealed Seal 10 Exhibit E of Joint Letter Brief re GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect Motion for Protective Order Against redacted portions at Google’s confidential information 11 Plaintiffs’ Non-Party Subpoena on regarding its products and systems, Ernst & Young LLP 32:15 including details related to Google’s 12 internal operations related to internal 13 projects, which Google maintains as confidential in the ordinary course of 14 its business and is not generally known to the public or Google’s 15 competitors. 16 17 2. Dkt. 379 18 Court’s Ruling Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling 19 Sealed Seal 20 S Te rap nte scm rib pe tr 30, 2021 Hearing G reR daA cN teT d E pD or tionas s at: to Narrowly tailored to protect confidential 21 technical information regarding sensitive features of Google’s internal 59:17; 65:4-6, 68:13- systems and operations, including 22 14; 69:1-2, 9-10, 14 Google’s internal identifiers/cookies 23 and their proprietary functions that Google maintains as confidential in the 24 ordinary course of its business and is not generally known to the public or 25 Google’s competitors as well as Plaintiffs’ personally identifiable 26 information. 27 3. Dkt. 384 1 2 Court’s Ruling Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling 3 Sealed Seal GRANTED as to 4 November 12, 2021 Order redacted portions at: Narrowly tailored to protect confidential and proprietary information regarding 5 sensitive features of Google’s internal 4:9; 4:13; 4:15 identifiers, systems, projects, data 6 structures, and operations that Google does not share publicly, including 7 particular internal data sources Google was ordered to search for data relating 8 to Plaintiffs, that Google maintains as confidential in the ordinary course of its 9 business and is not generally known to the public or Google’s competitors. 10 GRANTED as to 11 Exhibit 1 (Calhoun) to November redacted portions at: Narrowly tailored to protect confidential 12, 2021 Order and proprietary information regarding sensitive features of Google’s internal 12 Paragraphs 3.3, 3.4, identifiers, systems, projects, data 3.5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 6 13 structures, and operations that Google does not share publicly, including 14 particular internal data sources Google was ordered to search for data relating 15 to Plaintiffs, that Google maintains as confidential in the ordinary course of its 16 business and is not generally known to the public or Google’s competitors. 17 4. Dkt. 385 18 Court’s Ruling 19 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling 20 Sealed Seal GRANTED as to 21 November 4, 2021 Hearing redacted portions at: Narrowly tailored to protect Plaintiffs’ Transcript personally identifiable information and 22 22:21; 23:4-6 web browsing information. 23 24 November 4, 2021 Hearing GRANTED as to Narrowly tailored to protect confidential Transcript technical information regarding 25 redacted portions at: sensitive features of Google’s internal systems and operations, including 26 details related to Google’s internal 5:24; 6:23; 7:19; systems, practices, projects, identifiers, 27 7:21; 7:24; 8:15; cookies, the various types of logs maintained by Google, information 10:2; 10:8; 10:17; proprietary functions, that Google 1 10:19-25; 11:1-7; maintains as confidential in the ordinary 11:12: 11:14: 11:19: course of its business and is not 2 11:22: 12:3: 1 2:11; , generally known to the public or 3 12:13: 12:17: 12:19- Google’s competitors. 20; 12:25; 13:17; 4 13:23-25; 14:2-3; 14:6-10; 14:14: 5 14:24; 15:24; 16:4; 6 16:13; 16:15; 16:23; 17:7; 17:9; 17:12-14; 7 17:17; 17:25; 18:1; 18:11; 18:17; 18:19; 8 18:24; 19:17-20; 9 19:24-25; 20:5-6; 20:11; 21:6; 21:11- 10 12; 21:15; 21:17; 21:23; 22:12; 22:14; 11 22:19; 23:2; 23:21- 23; 24:3-4; 24:22-25; 25:1-3; 26:23; 28:3; 28:7; 28:9; 28:13; 29:15; 30:11; 30:13- 14; 30:20; 31:25; 32:10; 32:12; 32:18; 32:21; 33:15; 34:16; 2 35:4; 35:13: 35:15; 16 37:2; 37:7-8; 39:16- 47 17; 40:21-23; 42:6-7; 44:2 a 18 SO ORDERED. 19 Dated: November 23, 2021 20 21 Suse yer Kul 22 SUSAN VAN KEULEN United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10069715. Public record. Not legal advice.