Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC’s renewed motion to file Exhibits 5 and 6 under seal. Applying the good-cause standard, the Court found that Mercedes-Benz had not made a particularized showing of specific prejudice or harm from disclosure. The Court ordered Plaintiff to file the exhibits without redactions within 10 days.
Holdings
- Defendant failed to establish good cause to seal any portion of Exhibits 5 and 6 because it did not make a particularized showing that specific prejudice or harm would result from public disclosure.
Questions Presented
- Whether Defendant established good cause to seal redacted versions of Exhibits 5 and 6 containing purportedly confidential business information.
- Whether the court should order Plaintiff to file the response and Exhibits 5 and 6 on the public docket without redactions.
Disposition
denied
Cases Cited (7)
- Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978)(followed)
- Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2016)(followed)
- Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Beckman Industries, Inc. v. International Insurance Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Grano v. Sodexo Management, Inc., No. 18-cv-1818-RSH-BLM, 2022 WL 3371621, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 16, 2022)(followed)
- Vasquez v. O'Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, No. 1:21-CV-01099-DAD-SAB, 2022 WL 1645145, at *4 (E.D. Cal. May 24, 2022)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…