# In re Google Assistant Privacy Litigation

> District Court, N.D. California · February 22, 2023

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10074386

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, N.D. California
- **Decided:** February 22, 2023
- **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/10074386

## Opinion text

1
2
3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5 SAN JOSE DIVISION
6
7 ASIF KUMANDAN, et al., Case No. 19-cv-04286-BLF

8 Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
9 v. DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO
SEAL
10 GOOGLE LLC, et al.,
[Re: ECF Nos. 304, 345 358, 369]
11 Defendants.

12
13

14
15 Before the Court are several motions to seal materials submitted with the parties’ briefing
16 on Plaintiff’s motion for class certification. See ECF Nos. 304, 345 358. The parties also
17 submitted a request to seal portions of the Court’s order on Plaintiffs’ motion for class
18 certification. See ECF No. 369. For the reasons stated below, the motion at ECF No. 304 is
19 GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART without prejudice and the motions at ECF Nos.
20 345, 358, and 369 are GRANTED.
21 I. LEGAL STANDARD
22 “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records
23 and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. Of
24 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435
25 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are
26 “more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of
27 “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. For Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092,
1 upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097.
2 In addition, in this district, all parties requesting sealing must comply with Civil Local
3 Rule 79-5. That rule requires that the moving party to provide “the reasons for keeping a
4 document under seal, including an explanation of: (i) the legitimate private or public interests that
5 warrant sealing; (ii) the injury that will result if sealing is denied; and (iii) why a less restrictive
6 alternative to sealing is not sufficient.” Civ. L.R. 79-5©(1)(i). The rule also requires the moving
7 party to provide “evidentiary support from declarations where necessary.” Civ. L.R. 79-5©(1)(ii).
8 II. DISCUSSION
9 This Court previously determined “that the compelling reasons standard applies to motions
10 to seal documents relating to class certification.” Adtrader, Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 17-CV-
11 07082-BLF, 2020 WL 6391210, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2020).
12 A. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal and to Consider Whether Another Party’s Material
Should be Sealed (ECF No. 304)
13
Plaintiffs submitted a motion to seal materials submitted with their Reply Brief in Support
14
of Motion for Class Certification (“Reply”). See ECF No. 304. The motion requests to seal
15
materials that both Plaintiffs and Google have designated confidential. Google submitted a
16
statement in support. ECF No. 307.
17
1. Plaintiffs’ Requests
18
Plaintiffs request to seal two documents: (1) a document that is Bates stamped
19
SPURR000023 and (2) excerpts of the deposition of plaintiff Lourdes Galvan, dated August 4,
20
2022. See ECF No. 304 ¶¶ 6-7. Plaintiffs request is not narrowly tailored. However, Plaintiffs
21
submitted a more narrowly tailored request regarding these documents at ECF Nos. 358-1 and
22
358-6. As discussed below, in § II.C, the Court is granting that more narrowly tailored request.
23
The Court therefore grants Plaintiffs’ request in part. Specifically, the Court GRANTS to the
24
extent it is limited to the narrowly tailored redactions submitted at ECF Nos. 358-1 and 358-6.
25
2. Google’s Requests
26
Google declares that the materials it seeks to seal contain “confidential and highly sensitive
27
proprietary and commercial information about (1) the operation of Google Assistant; (2)
1 competitively sensitive business opportunities and risks; and (3) details of Google’s understanding
2 of the profits or losses associated with Google Assistant.” Crowel Decl. Supp. Admin. Mot. to
3 Consider Whether Defs.’ Material Should be Sealed ¶ 5, ECF No. 307-1. Google further declares
4 that disclosure of the information would cause Google competitive harm by giving competitors
5 insight into the development and operation of Google Assistant. Id.
6 Courts in this district have found that compelling reasons exist to seal the information
7 Google requests to seal. See Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., No. 13-CV-05808-HSG, 2016 WL
8 7911651, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2016) (finding “technical operation of [defendant’s] products”
9 sealable under “compelling reasons” standard); Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., No. 17-
10 CV-04810-HSG, 2020 WL 2838812, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020) (noting that courts have found
11 “confidential business information” in the form of “business strategies” sealable under the
12 compelling reasons standard.); Brown v. Brown, No. CV 13-03318 SI, 2013 WL 12400041, at *1
13 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 2013) (finding compelling reasons to seal information about “profits, losses,
14 income, investments, and expenses” when disclosure would harm party’s competitive standing).
15 The Court agrees that such information is sealable and finds that Google has mostly narrowly
16 tailored its request to such information. There are some instances in which Google has not
17 narrowly tailored its requests, however. The Court therefore GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN
18 PART Google’s request to seal. The Court has set forth its rulings on specific documents in the
19 table below.
20 * * *
21
ECF No. Document Requested Ruling
22
Portions to
23 Seal
304-3 Plaintiffs’ Reply to Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
24 Google’s Motion for portions on highly sensitive proprietary and
Class Certification pages 2-6, 12- commercial information about
25 13 (1) the operation of Google
[Public redacted version Assistant; (2) business
26
at ECF No. 303] opportunities and risks; and (3)
27 details of Google’s understanding
of the profits or losses associated
1
No further action necessary, as a
2 public redacted version of this
document is filed at 303.
3 304-4 Excerpts of deposition Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
transcript of Terry Tai, Court’s Order at ECF No. 282, at
4 dated June 30, 2020 7:28-8:3. Excerpt contains
confidential and highly sensitive
5
proprietary and commercial
6 information about the operation
of Google Assistant.
7
No further action necessary.
8 304-5 SPURR00023-28 Entirety GRANTED IN PART. The
Court grants the request to the
9
extent it is limited to the
10 redactions proposed in ECF No.
358-1.
11
No further action necessary, as
12
this order directs Plaintiffs to file
a public redacted version of ECF
13
No. 358-1.
14 304-6 GOOG-ASST-03034181 Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
Court’s order at ECF No. 282, at
15 7:28-8:3. Contains confidential
and highly sensitive proprietary
16
and commercial information
17 about the operation of Google
Assistant.
18
No further action necessary.
19 304-7 GOOG-ASST-00221071 Entirety GRANTED, as confidential and
highly sensitive proprietary
20
information about the operation
21 of Google Assistant.

22 No further action necessary.
304-8 GOOG-ASST-03026521 Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
23 Court’s order at ECF No. 282, at
7:21-24. Contains confidential
24
and highly sensitive proprietary
25 and commercial information
about the operation of Google
26 Assistant.

27
No further action necessary.
highly sensitive proprietary
1
information about the operation
2 of Google Assistant.

3 No further action necessary.
304-10 GOOG-ASST-00238568 Entirety GRANTED, as confidential and
4 highly sensitive proprietary
information about the operation
5
of Google Assistant.
6
No further action necessary.
7 304-11 GOOG-ASST-00213485 Entirety GRANTED, as confidential and
highly sensitive proprietary
8 information about the operation
of Google Assistant.
9

10 No further action necessary.
304-12 Excerpts of deposition of Entirety GRANTED IN PART. The Court
11 Lourdes Galvan, dated GRANTS the request to the
August 4, 2022 extent it is limited to the
12
redactions proposed in ECF No.
13 358-6.

14 No further action necessary, as
this order directs Plaintiffs to file
15 a public redacted version of ECF
No. 358-6.
16
304-13 Declaration of F. Torres Highlighted GRANTED. Sealed under this
17 in Support of Plaintiffs’ portion on Court’s Order at ECF No. 282, at
Motion for Class pages 9-10, 15, 11:8-3 Highlighted portions
18 Certification 20-21, 26, 30- reflect confidential and highly
36 sensitive proprietary and
19 commercial information about
(1) the operation of Google
20
Assistant and (2) details of
21 Google’s understanding of the
profits or losses associated with
22 Google Assistant.

23 No further action necessary, as a
public redacted version is filed at
24
303-30.
25 304-14 Excerpts of deposition of Entirety GRANTED, as confidential and
Fernando Torres, dated highly sensitive proprietary
26 September 7, 2022 information about details of
Google’s understanding of the
27
profits or losses associated with
1
No further action necessary.
2 304-15 Excerpts of deposition of Entirety GRANTED, as confidential and
Hailey Crowel, dated July highly sensitive proprietary
3 21, 2022 information about details of
Google’s understanding of the
4 profits or losses associated with
Google Assistant.
5

6 No further action necessary.
304-16 GOOG-ASST-03045589 Entirety GRANTED, as confidential and
7 highly sensitive proprietary
information about details of
8 Google’s understanding of the
profits or losses associated with
9
Google Assistant.
10
No further action necessary.
11 304-17 GOOG-ASST03045632 Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
Court’s order at ECF No. 282,
12
6:4-7. Contains confidential and
13 highly sensitive proprietary and
commercial information about
14 the profits or losses of Google
Assistant.
15
No further action necessary.
16
304-18 Reply Report to the Entirety DENIED without prejudice, as
17 Expert Report of Jesse the request is not narrowly
David PhD by Fernando tailored.
18 Torres
Google shall file either a further
19 motion to seal this document
with more narrowly tailored
20
redactions or a public unredacted
21 version of this document by no
later than March 3, 2023.
22 304-19 GOOG-ASST-03026959 Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
Court’s order at ECF No. 318, at
23 3:22-26. Contains confidential
and highly sensitive proprietary
24
and commercial information
25 about the operation of Google
Assistant.
26
No further action necessary.
27
304-20 GOOG-ASST-03029199 Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
3:27-4:3. Contains confidential
1
and highly sensitive proprietary
2 and commercial information
about the operation of Google
3 Assistant.

4 No further action necessary.
304-21 GOOG-ASST-03029199 Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
5
Court’s order at ECF No. 318, at
6 4:4-9. Contains confidential and
highly sensitive proprietary and
7 commercial information about
the operation of Google
8 Assistant.

9
No further action necessary.
10 304-22 Expert Reply Report of Entirety DENIED without prejudice.
Rebecca Reed-Arthurs Plaintiffs move to seal based on
11 Ph.D. purported inclusion of material
Google designated highly
12
confidential, but Google does not
request to seal any portion of this
13
document.
14
Google shall file either a further
15 motion to seal this document
with narrowly tailored redactions
16
or a public unredacted version of
17 this document by no later than
March 3, 2023.
18 304-23 Opening Expert Report of Entirety GRANTED. Sealed under this
Rebecca Reed-Arthurs, Court’s order at ECF No. 282, at
19 Ph.D. 11:14-20. Document reflects
confidential and highly sensitive
20
proprietary and commercial
21 information about (1) the
operation of Google Assistant (2)
22 business opportunities and risks;
and (3) details of Google’s
23 understanding of the profits or
losses associated with Google
24
Assistant.
25
No further action necessary.
26
B. Google’s Further Administrative Motion to Seal (ECF No. 345)
27
On October 17, 2022, the Court denied in part without prejudice Google’s request to seal
1 certain documents submitted with its opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification
2 because some of the requests were not narrowly tailored. See ECF No. 318. Google submitted a
3 further administrative motion to seal portions of these documents. See ECF No. 345. The Court
4 now considers this request.
5 Google seeks to seal portions of deposition transcripts. Google’s request is now narrowly
6 tailored to seal only the portions of these transcripts containing confidential and highly sensitive
7 proprietary and commercial information about (1) the operation of Google Assistant; (2)
8 competitively sensitive business opportunities and risks; and (3) details of Google’s understanding
9 of the profits or losses associated with Google Assistant. See Decl. of Hailey Crowel Supp. Defs.’
10 Further Admin. Mot to File Under Seal ¶ 5, ECF No. 345-1. And Google has explained how
11 disclosure of the information would cause Google competitive harm. See id. Courts in this
12 district have found that compelling reasons exist to seal such information. See Finjan, 2016 WL
13 7911651, at *1 (finding “technical operation of [defendant’s] products” sealable under
14 “compelling reasons” standard); Exeltis, 2020 WL 2838812, at *1 (“Courts have found that
15 confidential business information in the form of . . . business strategies satisfies the compelling
16 reasons standard.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Brown, 2013 WL 12400041, at *1 (finding
17 compelling reasons to seal information about “profits, losses, income, investments, and expenses”
18 when disclosure would harm party’s competitive standing).
19 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Google’s motion to seal at ECF No. 345 as set forth in
20 the following table.
21
ECF No. Document Requested Ruling
22
Portions to
23 Seal
345-3 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
24 Deposition of Francoise Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
Beaufays, dated April 12, commercial information about
25 2022 the operation of Google
Assistant.
26

27 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
345-4 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
1
Deposition of Francoise Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
2 Beaufays, dated April 22, commercial information about
2022 the operation of Google
3 Assistant.

4 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
5
by no later than March 3, 2023.
6 345-5 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
Deposition of Yair Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
7 Cohen, dated July 15, commercial information about
2022 (1) the operation of Google
8 Assistant and (2) business
opportunities and risks.
9

10 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
11 by no later than March 3, 2023.
345-6 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
12
Deposition of Alex Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
Gruenstein, dated May commercial information about
13
24, 2022 the operation of Google
14 Assistant.

15 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
16
by no later than March 3, 2023.
17 345-7 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
Deposition of Hailey Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
18 Crowel, dated July 21, commercial information about
2022 (1) business opportunities and
19 risks and (2) details of Google’s
understanding of the profits or
20
losses associated with Google
21 Assistant.

22 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
23 by no later than March 3, 2023.
345-8 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
24
Deposition of Hailey Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
25 Crowel, dated August 10, commercial information about
2022 (1) business opportunities and
26 risks and (2) details of Google’s
understanding of the profits or
27 losses associated with Google
1
Google SHALL file a public
2 redacted version of this document
by no later than March 3, 2023.
3 345-9 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
Deposition of Brian Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
4 Horling, dated June 13, commercial information about
2022 (1) the operation of Google
5
Assistant and (2) business
6 opportunities and risks.

7 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
8 by no later than March 3, 2023.
345-10 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
9
Deposition of Caroline Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
10 Kenny, dated April 14, commercial information about
2022 the operation of Google
11 Assistant.

12
Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
13
by no later than March 3, 2023.
14 345-11 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
Deposition of Ashwin Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
15 Sunder, dated May 13, commercial information about
2022 (1) the operation of Google
16
Assistant and (2) business
17 opportunities and risks.

18 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
19 by no later than March 3, 2023.
345-12 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as confidential and
20
Deposition of Terry Tai, Portions highly sensitive proprietary and
21 dated June 22, 2022 commercial information about
the operation of Google
22 Assistant.

23 Google SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
24
by no later than March 3, 2023.
25
C. Plaintiffs’ Renewed Request to Seal Documents Submitted with Google’s
26 Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (ECF No. 358)
On November 17, 2022, the Court denied without prejudice Plaintiffs’ request to seal
27
1 because the request was not narrowly tailored. See ECF No. 356. Plaintiffs subsequently
2 submitted a renewed request that is more narrowly tailored. See ECF No. 358. The Court now
3 considers this renewed request.
4 Plaintiffs request to seal portions of documents produced in the litigation and interrogatory
5 responses. The portions of the documents Plaintiffs seek to seal include email addresses, home
6 addresses, device identification numbers, and other similar information. Courts in this district
7 have found that compelling reasons exist to seal such material. See Nursing Home Pension Fund
8 v. Oracle Corp., No. C01-00988 MJJ, 2007 WL 3232267, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2007) (home
9 address and financial account information); O’Connor v. Uber Techs., Inc., No. C-13-3826 EMC,
10 2015 WL 355496, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2015) (email address); Darisse v. Nest Labs, Inc., No.
11 14-CV-01363-BLF, 2016 WL 11474174 (N.D. Cal. June 2, 2016) (device serial number). The
12 Court agrees that such material is sealable under the compelling reasons standard and finds that
13 Plaintiffs have now narrowly tailored their request. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’
14 request to seal at ECF No. 358, as set forth in the following table.
15 The Court notes that its order at ECF No. 356 had also denied without prejudice Plaintiffs’
16 request to seal portions of Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification
17 (“Opposition”). See ECF No. 356, at 3:10-13. Plaintiffs did not seek to seal any portions of the
18 Opposition in their renewed request. The Court interprets this omission to mean that Plaintiffs no
19 longer seek to seal portions of the Opposition. The Court previously granted Google’s request to
20 seal portions of this document but instructed Google not to file a public redacted version until after
21 Plaintiffs had the opportunity to propose their own redactions. See ECF No. 318, at 14:3-7. The
22 Court therefore DIRECTS Google to file a public redacted version of the Opposition with the
23 redactions permitted in the Court’s order at ECF No. 318.1
24
ECF No. Document Requested Ruling
25
Portions to
26 Seal
358-1 SPURR000023 Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
27
Portions personally identifying
1
information.
2
Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
3 redacted version of this document
by no later than March 3, 2023.
4 358-2 STEVE-SPURR000347 Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
Portions personally identifying
5
(Exhibit 64 to the information.
6 Declaration of Sunita Bali
in support of Defendants’ Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
7 Opposition to Plaintiffs’ redacted version of this document
Motion for Class by no later than March 3, 2023.
8 Certification)
358-3 STEVE-SPURR000733 Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
9
Portions personally identifying
10 information.

11 Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
12
by no later than March 3, 2023.
13 358-4 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
Deposition of Frank Portions personally identifying
14 Aguiar, dated September information.
5, 2022
15 Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
16
by no later than March 3, 2023.
17 358-5 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
Deposition of Eleeanna Portions personally identifying
18 Galvan, dated August 5, information.
2022
19 Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
20
by no later than March 3, 2023.
21 358-6 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
Deposition of Lourdes Portions personally identifying
22 Galvan, dated August 4, information.
2022
23 Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
redacted version of this document
24
by no later than March 3, 2023.
25 358-7 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
Deposition of Melissa Portions personally identifying
26 Spurr, dated August 15, information.
2022
27
Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
by no later than March 3, 2023.
1
358-8 Excerpts of Transcript of Highlighted GRANTED, as sensitive
2 Deposition of Steven Portions personally identifying
Spurr, dated September 6, information.
3 2022
Plaintiffs SHALL file a public
4 redacted version of this document
by no later than March 3, 2023.
5
6 D. Joint Motion to Seal Portions of Order on Class Certification (ECF No. 369)
7 The parties submitted a Joint Request in Support of Proposed Redactions to Class
8 Certification Order. ECF No. 369. Each party requests to seal certain portions of the Court’s
9 order on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. The Court addresses each party’s request in
10 turn.
11 Plaintiffs request to seal Plaintiff Melissa Spurr’s personal email address. The Court finds
12 compelling reasons exist to seal this email address, as it is not relevant to the litigation and the
13 public has no real interest in its disclosure. See, e.g., O’Connor, 2015 WL 355496, at *3 (N.D.
14 Cal. Jan. 27, 2015).
15 Google requests to seal certain excerpts of Class Certification Order that contain technical
16 information about the operation of Google Assistant. The Court finds that Google has met the
17 compelling reasons standard for sealing this technical information because release of the
18 information would threaten Google’s competitive interests. See In re Elec. Arts, Inc., 298 F.
19 App’x 568, 569 (9th Cir. 2008) (ordering sealing where documents could be used “‘as sources of
20 business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing’”) (quoting Nixon, 435 U.S.
21 at 598); see also In re Koninklijke Philips Pat. Litig., No. 18-CV-01885-HSG, 2020 WL 1865294
22 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2020) (compelling reasons exist to seal information concerning “technical
23 product operation”).
24 The Court hereby GRANTS the parties’ joint motion, as the parties have demonstrated
25 compelling reasons to seal the portions of the order they respectively request to seal. A public
26 redacted version of the order has already been filed at ECF No. 369-2. No further action is
27 necessary.
1 /
2 || I. ORDER
3 For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
4 1. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal and to Consider Whether Another Party’s Material Should be
5 Sealed at ECF No. 304 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Google shall file
6 either a further motion to seal or public unredacted versions of ECF Nos. 304-18 & 304-22
7 consistent with the Court’s direction in the table in § ILA of this order by no later than
8 March 3, 2023.
9 2. Google’s Administrative Motion to Seal at ECF No. 345 is GRANTED. Google shall file
10 public redacted versions of the exhibits consistent with the Court’s direction in the table
11 § IIB of this order by no later than March 3, 2023.
12 3. Plaintiffs’ renewed request to seal at ECF No. 358 is GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall file
5 13 public redacted version of the exhibits consistent with the Court’s direction in the table in
14 § ILC of this order by no later than March 3, 2023.
3 15 4. The parties’ Joint Motion to Seal Portions of Order on Class Certification at ECF No. 369
a 16 is GRANTED.
3 17 5. Google SHALL file a public redacted version of the Opposition, which Google submitted
18 with proposed redactions at ECF No. 271-2, with the redactions permitted in the Court’s
19 order at ECF No. 318.
20
21 Dated: February 22, 2023

BETH LABSON FREEMAN
23 United States District Judge
24
25
26
27
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10074386. Public record. Not legal advice.