Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 21STCV41141, Date: 2023-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV41141    Hearing Date: August 11, 2023    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            This is a PAGA action alleging various wage and labor code violations. The parties reached a settlement and have a pending motion to approve said settlement. At issue presently is Defendants’ motion to seal a copy of the settlement agreement that was filed in support of the motion to approve settlement. There is no opposition to the motion.

LEGAL STANDARD

“Unless confidentiality is required by law, court records are presumed to be open.” (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 2.550(c).) “The court may order that a record be filed under seal only if it expressly finds facts that establish: (1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4) The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.” (Id., subd. (d).) “A record must not be filed under seal without a court order.” (Id., rule 2.551(a).)

DISCUSSION

            The Court finds an overriding interest supporting sealing the record. The settlement agreement contains a confidentiality clause. (Haeusler Decl. ¶ 4; Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1273, 1283) The agreement contains information about Defendant’s business operations and litigation strategies that may harm Defendant if exposed to the public. (Id., ¶ 6.) The request to seal certain portions of the agreement is narrowly tailored, and no less restrictive means exist for protecting Defendant’s privacy. (Id., ¶ 7.)

CONCLUSION

            Defendants’ motion to seal is GRANTED.