Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: BC707741, Date: 2023-01-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC707741    Hearing Date: January 12, 2023    Dept: C

WATSON v. MAKITA U.S.A, INC.

CASE NO.:  BC707741

HEARING:  01/12/23

#5

TENTATIVE ORDER

Defendants’ unopposed Motion to Seal Confidential Documents Used and Referenced in Plaintiff’s Opposition to MAKITA CORPORATION’s Motion to Quash Plaintiff’s Service of Summons and Complaint for Lack of Jurisdiction is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give notice.

No Opposition filed as of January 10, 2023.

The Court notes that Defendant MAKITA CORPORATION’s Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint was GRANTED on September 29, 2022.

“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.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(d).) Financial information involving confidential matters relating to the business operations of a party may be sealed where public revelation of the information would interfere with the party’s ability to effectively compete in the marketplace and there is a substantial probability that their revelation would prejudice the foregoing legitimate interests of the party. (Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1273, 1285-1286.)

The Court is in receipt of the Declaration of David Haefner filed on September 26, 2022 in Support of the instant Motion. Mr. Haefner is the current Field Product Training Manager for Makita U.S.A., Inc. (Haefner Decl., ¶1.)  In his Declaration, Mr. Haefner states: “Plaintiff’s documents requests to Makita USA in this lawsuit have included requests for certain confidential documents. Those documents were produced by Defendants to Plaintiff under a Stipulated Protective Order that was issued by this Court on November 18, 2020…. All of the exhibits which are the subject of the Motion to Seal were designated by Makita USA or Makita Corporation… as ‘Confidential’ under the SPO. All of the following confidential documents relate to Makita USA and should therefore be sealed: (a) Exhibits 5-6, 23-24, 26-27, and 31 to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Makita Japan’s Motion to Quash for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction…. (b) Plaintiff’s Unredacted Opposition to Makita Japan’s Motion to Quash for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction.” (Haefner Decl., ¶2.)

The motion to seal is GRANTED. The Court finds that the parties’ interest in the confidentiality of Makita USA’s business operations’ information overcomes the right of public access to court records. This overriding interest supports sealing the records. This order is narrowly tailored, and no less restrictive means exist to protect the parties’ confidential information.