Judge: Lon F. Hurwitz, Case: 2021-01225031, Date: 2022-12-16 Tentative Ruling

Motion to File Under Seal

RULING:

Defendant’s Motion is Granted in part.

“The public has a First Amendment right of access to civil litigation documents filed in court and used at trial or submitted as a basis for adjudication.” (Savaglio v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 588, 596-597). As a result, a Court may order a record sealed only if it expressly finds facts that establish certain enumerated factors. (CRC 2.550(d).) Included among these findings is the existence of an overriding interest that overcomes the public right to access and a substantial probability that interest will be prejudiced by exposure. (CRC 2.550(d)). An order granting a motion to seal must include the specific facts, which support these findings. (CRC 2.550(e)). A Motion to Seal “must be accompanied by a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing.” (CRC 2.551(b)(1)).

As explained in Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1273, Court’s ordinarily seal “matters relating to the business operations of defendant” if “public revelation of these matters would interfere with its ability to effectively compete in the marketplace” or “there is a substantial probability that their revelation would prejudice the…legitimate interest of defendant.” (Id. at 1286).

To demonstrate confidentiality, Defendants supplemented their motion with the Declaration of Amrit Raj (ROA 232). In the Declaration, Defendants withdrew their Motion as to Exhibits A, B, F, and M. No portion of these exhibits will be sealed.

As for the remaining exhibits (C-E, N-Q, T, V-Y, and AA), Defendants and Mr. Raj submit proposed redactions to the documents that are narrowly tailored to information that is either financial in nature or invades a third-party right of privacy. Therefore, Defendant has provided sufficient facts to permit this Court to issue an order pursuant to CRC 2.550(d) and the Motion is granted as to these exhibits, and only to the extent of the redactions presented by Defendants in the Supplemental Declaration of Amrit Raj (ROA 232). To the extent that Defendants have filed any fully-redacted exhibits in support of their Motion to Confirm Arbitration, Defendants are ordered to re-file the exhibits as proposed in ROA 232.

Moving parties to give notice.