# Brown v. Google LLC

> District Court, N.D. California · March 17, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10070790

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, N.D. California
- **Decided:** March 17, 2022
- **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/10070790

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7 CHASOM BROWN, et al., Case No. 20-cv-03664-YGR (SVK)

8 Plaintiffs,
ORDER INSTRUCTING PARTIES RE
9 v. FUTURE SEALING MOTIONS

10 GOOGLE LLC, ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE
11 Defendant. UNDER SEAL

12 Re: Dkt. Nos. 410, 423, 436, 452, 455, 463,
469, 470, 475
13

14

15
ORDER INSTRUCTING PARTIES RE FUTURE SEALING MOTIONS
16
In the proposed orders on future sealing motions relating to discovery-related filings, the
17
Court requests that the party seeking to seal material include for the Court’s consideration
18
proposed language regarding the reason(s) for the Court’s ruling (see, e.g., Dkt. 337-2), rather than
19
simply cross-referencing the document(s) filed in support of the sealing request (see., e.g., Dkt.
20
470-2).
21

22 ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER
SEAL
23
Before the Court are several administrative motions to file under seal materials associated
24
with discovery disputes in this case. Dkt. 410, 423, 436, 452, 455, 463, 469, 470, 475; see also
25
Dkt. 421, 459.
26
Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents,
27
including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d
1 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7
2 (1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of
3 access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d
4 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to
5 court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party
6 seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the
7 underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For
8 Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to
motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower
9
“good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party
10
moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local
11
Rule 79-5.
12
Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information the parties seek to seal
13
was submitted to the Court in connection with discovery-related motions, rather than a motion that
14
concerns the merits of the case. The Court may reach different conclusions regarding sealing
15
these documents under different standards or in a different context. Having considered the
16
motions to seal, supporting declarations, and the pleadings on file, and good cause appearing, the
17
Court ORDERS as follows:
18
1. Dkt. 410
19

20
Court’s Ruling
21 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
Sealed Seal
22
GRANTED as to
30(b)(6) Joint Letter Brief
23 redacted portions The information requested to be
at: sealed contains Google’s
24 Pages 1:14-15, confidential and proprietary
25 1 1: :1 26 4, , 1 1: :1 28 7, , 1 2: :2 11 , , i fn eafo turm rea s t oio fn G, ore og ga lr ed ’sin ig n ts ee rn ns ai lt i sv ye s tems
26 2:8-12, 2:17, and operations, including details
2:19, 2:25, 3:4- related to internal projects,
27 5, 4:1-2, 4:8. identifiers, cookies, and their
proprietary functionalities, as well as
5:1, 5:6-7, 5;15- that Google maintains as
1
16 confidential in the ordinary course of
2 its business and is not generally
known to the public or Google’s
3 competitors. Such confidential and
proprietary information reveals
4 Google’s internal strategies, and
business practices for operating and
5
maintaining many of its services.
6 Public disclosure of such
confidential and proprietary
7 information could affect Google’s
competitive standing as competitors
8 may alter their systems and practices
relating to competing products. It
9
may also place Google at an
10 increased risk of cyber security
threats, as third parties may seek to
11 use the information to compromise
Google’s internal practices relating
12 to competing products.
13 Exhibit A to 30(b)(6) Joint GRANTED as to The information requested to be
redacted portions
Letter Brief sealed contains Google’s
14 at:
confidential and proprietary
15 Pages 1:4, 1:8, information, regarding sensitive
2:7, 3:15, 6:8- features of Google’s internal
16 10, 6:13, 7:4, systems and operations, including
7:7, 7:10, 7:12, details related to internal projects,
17 8:8. 15:5, 15;8, identifiers, cookies, and their
15:10, 16:15, proprietary functionalities, as well
18 17:4, 17:6, as internal investigations of
19 21:11, 21:14-15, features, that Google maintains as
22:3, 22:5, 22;7- confidential in the ordinary course
20 9, 22:12, 23:3, of its business and is not generally
23:6, 23:13, known to the public or Google’s
21 24:5, 25:10, competitors. Such confidential and
22 25:13, 25:15, proprietary information reveals
26:9-10, 27:10- Google’s internal strategies, and
23 11, 27:13, business practices for operating and
27:15, 31:14, maintaining many of its services.
24 32:6, 32:13 Public disclosure of such
confidential and proprietary
25
information could affect Google’s
26 competitive standing as competitors
may alter their systems and
27 practices relating to competing
products. It may also place Google
security threats, as third parties may
1
seek to use the information to
2 compromise Google’s internal
practices relating to competing
3 products.
4
5 2. Dkt. 423
6
Court’s Ruling
7 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
8 Sealed Seal
GRANTED as to
9 Joint Submission in Response to redacted portions The information requested to be
Dkt. 416 Re: Status of Discovery sealed contains Google’s
at:
10 Disputes confidential and proprietary
PDF pp. 4-8, information, regarding sensitive
11 13-14, 18, 22 features of Google’s internal
systems and operations, including
12
details related to internal projects,
13 identifiers, and cookies, and their
proprietary functionalities, that
14 Google maintains as confidential in
the ordinary course of its business
15 and is not generally known to the
public or Google’s competitors.
16
Such confidential and proprietary
17 information reveals Google’s
internal strategies, and business
18 practices for operating and
maintaining many of its services.
19
Public disclosure of such
confidential and proprietary
20
information could affect Google’s
21 competitive standing as competitors
may alter their systems and
22 practices relating to competing
products. It may also place Google
23
at an increased risk of cyber
24 security threats, as third parties may
seek to use the information to
25 compromise Google’s internal
practices relating to competing
26 products.
27
3. Dkt. 436
1
Court’s Ruling
2 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
Sealed Seal
3 GRANTED as to
Ex. A to February 22, 2022 Order on redacted portions at: The information requested to be
4 the Parties’ joint discovery letter sealed contains non-public, sensitive
brief re Plaintiffs’ Rule 30(b)(6) 1:4, 1:8, 2:7, 3:15, confidential business information
5 deposition notices 6:8-10, 6:13, 7:4, 7:7, related to Google’s internal
6 7:10, 7:12, 8:8, 15:5, technological systems that could
15;8, 15:10, 16:15, affect Google’s competitive standing
7 17:4, 17:6, 21:11, and may expose Google to increased
21:13-15, 22:3-4, security risks if publicly disclosed,
8 22:5, 22;7-9, 22:12, including details related to internal
9 23:3, 23:6, 23:13, projects, identifiers, and cookies, and
24:5, 25:10, 25:13, their proprietary functionalities,
10 25:15, 26:9- 10, which Google maintains as
27:10-11, 27:13, confidential in the ordinary course of
11 27:15, 31:14, 32:6, its business and is not generally
32:13 known to the public or Google’s
12 competitors. Such confidential
information reveals Google’s
13
internal systems and operations.
14 Public disclosure of such
confidential information could affect
15 Google’s competitive standing as
competitors may alter their system
16 designs and practices relating to
competing products, time strategic
17
litigation, or otherwise unfairly
18 compete with Google.
19 4. Dkt. 452

20
Court’s Ruling
21 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
Sealed Seal
22
GRANTED
Ex. A (GOOG-BROWN 00023909) The information sought to be sealed
23
to Google’s Submission Re: P23 contains confidential information
24 about Google’s employees working
on certain products that Google does
25 not share publicly and maintains as
confidential in the ordinary course of
26 its business and is not generally
known to the public or Google’s
27
competitors. Specifically, this
to the names, organizational
1
division, manager, and title of
2 Google employees working on
certain products. Such information
3 reveals Google’s internal strategies
and business practices for operating
4 and maintaining many of its
services. Public disclosure of the
5
above-listed information would harm
6 Google’s competitive standing by
revealing confidential information
7 relating to Google’s employees
working on certain competing
8 products to Google’s competitors,
allowing them to understand which
9
employees are working on which
10 competing products and recruit or
contact those employees, alter their
11 own plans for product development
and/or commercialization, time
12 strategic litigation, focus their patent
prosecution strategies, or otherwise
13
unfairly compete with Google.
14
5. Dkt. 455
15

16 Court’s Ruling
Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
17 Sealed Seal
18 Joint Submission In Response To Dkt. GRANTED as to
447-1 Re: Plaintiffs’ Request For In redacted portions at: The information sought to be sealed
19 Camera Submission contains confidential and proprietary
2:4, 2:22, 3:4 information regarding highly
20 sensitive features of Google’s
internal systems and operations that
21 Google does not share publicly and
maintains as confidential in the
22
ordinary course of its business and is
23 not generally known to the public or
Google’s competitors. Specifically,
24 this information provides details
related to various types of Google’s
25 internal data signals and logs and
their proprietary functionalities.
26
Such information reveals Google’s
27 internal strategies, system designs,
and business practices for operating
while complying with legal and
1
privacy obligations. Public
2 disclosure of the above-listed
information would harm Google’s
3 competitive standing it has earned
through years of innovation and
4 careful deliberation, by revealing
sensitive aspects of Google’s
5
proprietary systems, strategies, and
6 designs to Google’s competitors,
allowing them to alter their own
7 plans for product development
and/or commercialization, time
8 strategic litigation, focus their patent
prosecution strategies, or otherwise
9
unfairly compete with Google.
10
6. Dkt. 463
11

12 Court’s Ruling
Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
13 Sealed Seal
Joint Submission Re: Google’s RFA GRANTED as to
14 and Interrogatory Responses redacted portions at: The information requested to be
15 sealed contains confidential and
1:21, 1:28, 2:1-10, proprietary information regarding
16 2:23, 3:19, 4:3-5, 4:7, sensitive features of Google’s
4:11-12 internal systems and operations that
17 Google does not share publicly and

maintains as confidential in the
18
ordinary course of its business and is
19 not generally known to the public or
Google’s competitors. Specifically,
20 this information provides details
related to various types of Google’s
21 internal project, data signals, and
logs and their proprietary
22
functionalities, as well as internal
23 metrics and investigation into
financial impact of certain features.
24 Such information reveals Google’s
internal strategies, system designs,
25 and business practices for operating
and maintaining many of its services
26
while complying with legal and
27 privacy obligations. Public
disclosure of the identified
competitive standing by revealing
1
sensitive aspects of Google’s
2 proprietary systems, strategies, and
designs to Google’s competitors,
3 allowing them to alter their own
plans for product development
4 and/or commercialization, time
strategic litigation, focus their patent
5
prosecution strategies, or otherwise
6 unfairly compete with Google.
Exhibit A GRANTED as to
7 redacted portions at: The information requested to be
sealed contains confidential and
8 Pages 1, 7, 11-21 proprietary information regarding
sensitive features of Google’s
9 internal systems and operations that
Google does not share publicly and
10
maintains as confidential in the
11 ordinary course of its business and is
not generally known to the public or
12 Google’s competitors. Specifically,
this information provides details
13 related to various types of Google’s
internal project, data signals, and
14
logs and their proprietary
15 functionalities, as well as internal
metrics and investigation into
16 financial impact of certain features.
Such information reveals Google’s
17
internal strategies, system designs,
and business practices for operating
18
and maintaining many of its services
19 while complying with legal and
privacy obligations. Public
20 disclosure of the identified
information risks harm to Google’s
21
competitive standing by revealing
22 sensitive aspects of Google’s
proprietary systems, strategies, and
23 designs to Google’s competitors,
allowing them to alter their own
24 plans for product development
and/or commercialization, time
25
strategic litigation, focus their patent
26 prosecution strategies, or otherwise
unfairly compete with Google.
27
7. Dkt. 469
1

2
Court’s Ruling
3 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
Sealed Seal
4 Ex. A to Joint Submission in Response GRANTED as to
to Dkts. 447 and 449 re: Sealing redacted portions at: The information requested to be
5 Portions of March 2, 2022 Order Re sealed contains personal and private
Discovery Disputes P25, P26, and P29 Pages 7-8 medical information related to a
6 Google employee, which Google
maintains as confidential in the
7
ordinary course of its business and is
8 not generally known to the public.
9 8. Dkt. 470
10
Court’s Ruling
11 Document Sought to be on Motion to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
12 Sealed Seal
Ex. A to March 1, 2022 Order GRANTED as to
13 Following February 28, 2022 redacted portions at: The information requested to be
Discovery Hearing sealed contains non-public, sensitive
14 Pages 3-4, 6-7, 10-13, confidential business information
16-17, 20-21 related to Google’s internal
15 technological systems that could
affect Google’s competitive standing
16
and may expose Google to increased
17 security risks if publicly disclosed,
including details related to internal
18 systems and operations that Google
does not share publicly, including
19 details related to internal projects,
identifiers, cookies, data field, and
20
logs and their proprietary
21 functionalities, internal
investigations of features, and
22 personal and private information
related to a Google employee, which
23 Google maintains as confidential in
the ordinary course of its business
24
and is not generally known to the
25 public or Google’s competitors.
Public disclosure of such
26 confidential information could affect
Google’s competitive standing as
27 competitors may alter their system
1 ompeting products, time strategic
itigation, or otherwise unfairly
2 ompete with Google.
3 9. Dkt. 475
4
Court’s Ruling
> Pocument>e a ee a ‘ee to Reason(s) for Court’s Ruling
ea
6 ranscript of February 28, 2022;IGRANTED as to
7 || |Discovery Hearing edacted portions at: [The information requested to be □
sealed contains non-public, sensitive
g Pages 7:1, 7:11, 8:5- onfidential business information
6. 8:12. 10:24. 11:14. related to Google’s internal
9 12:2-3. 12:5-7. 12:10, technological systems that could
12:23. 13:5. 18:5-6, affect Google’s competitive standing
10 18:22-19:1. 19:3. 4, may expose Google to increased
ll 19:7-8, 20:16-17, security risks if publicly disclosed,
28:17. 30:11. 31:20, jncluding details related to internal
3s 12 33:22-23, 34:4-5, ystems and operations that Google
34:18, 35:2, 37:17, [does not share publicly, including
13 37:24, 38:14, 44:24, Metails related to internal projects,
45:6, 45:14, 45:24, identifiers, data fields, dashboards,
14 46:7, 46:13- 17, [and logs and their proprietary
15 46:25, 47:3, 47:21-22, unctionalities, and internal
= 48:3, 48:6-8, 48:10- investigations of features, which
2 . □□□
16 12, 48:20, 48:23-24, Google maintains as confidential in
49:3, 49:6-7, 49:18, |the ordinary course of its business
= 17 49:22, 49:25, 50:2-4, and is not generally known to the
50:6-9. 51:21-22, [public or Google’s competitors.
Z 18 we Public di
52:6, 52:19, 52:21-22, ublic disclosure of such
19 58:17-19, 58:25, onfidential information could affect
59:16, 59:21. 60:13, CGoogle’s competitive standing as
20 65:24, 66:25, 79:18 Competitors may alter their system
designs and practices relating to
21 ompeting products, time strategic
litigation, or otherwise unfairly
ompete with Google.
23 SO ORDERED.
24 || Dated: March 17, 2022
25
26 Stason yeu
27 SUSAN VAN KEULEN
United States Magistrate Judge
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10070790. Public record. Not legal advice.