8 Cited authorities

Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc.
435 U.S. 589 (1978) Cited 5,968 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that "business information that might harm a litigant's competitive standing" can constitute a sufficient reason to preserve records under seal
Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC
809 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2016) Cited 2,064 times
Holding that we review for an abuse of discretion and that a court may seal records only for "a compelling reason"
Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
331 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 3,322 times
Holding that the Phillips exception is "expressly limited to the status of materials . . . attached to a non-dispositive motion"
In re Electronic Arts
298 F. App'x 568 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 299 times
Holding that "pricing terms, royalty rates, and guaranteed minimum payment terms" are trade secrets that is appropriate for sealing
In re Qualcomm Litig.
Case No. 3:17-cv-0108-GPC-MDD (S.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017) Cited 59 times
Finding compelling reasons to seal where the parties, through declarations from company officers, "provide[d] the Court with a factual basis for their claims that disclosing information subject to confidentiality agreements would harm the parties' respective competition standings"
Cohen v. Trump
Civil No. 13-CV-2519-GPC (WVG) (S.D. Cal. May. 26, 2016) Cited 8 times
Discussing other cases applying compelling reason standard to class certification motion after Center for Auto Safety and applying compelling reason standard
Velasco v. Chrysler Grp. LLC
Case No. CV 13-08080 DDP (VBK) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2017) Cited 3 times
Sealing "technical data pertaining to efforts to understand failures in [the product that] are inextricably intertwined with information about Chrysler's technical capacity"
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 94,303 times 646 Legal Analyses
Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated

8 Cited authorities

Holding that "business information that might harm a litigant's competitive standing" can constitute a sufficient reason to preserve records under seal

Holding that we review for an abuse of discretion and that a court may seal records only for "a compelling reason"

Holding that the Phillips exception is "expressly limited to the status of materials . . . attached to a non-dispositive motion"

Holding that "pricing terms, royalty rates, and guaranteed minimum payment terms" are trade secrets that is appropriate for sealing

Finding compelling reasons to seal where the parties, through declarations from company officers, "provide[d] the Court with a factual basis for their claims that disclosing information subject to confidentiality agreements would harm the parties' respective competition standings"

Discussing other cases applying compelling reason standard to class certification motion after Center for Auto Safety and applying compelling reason standard

Sealing "technical data pertaining to efforts to understand failures in [the product that] are inextricably intertwined with information about Chrysler's technical capacity"

Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37