Case Name: Darren Pederson v. Apple, Inc., et al.
Case No.: 2012-1-CV-235530

This is an inactive putative class action for fraudulent business practices related to the Apple TV. Before the Court is defendant Apple, Inc.’s motion to seal documents filed in support of plaintiff’s motion for class certification, which is unopposed.

I. Legal Standard

California Rules of Court, rules 2.550 and 2.551 set forth specific criteria for permanently sealing court records. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(d) [stating that the court must make the following express factual findings before granting leave to file records under seal: (1) an overriding interest overcomes the public’s presumptive right of access to court records, (2) that interest supports sealing the records, (3) a substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the records are not sealed, (4) the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored, and (5) no less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest].)

These criteria do not directly apply to “discovery motions and records filed or lodged in connection with discovery motions or proceedings.” (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(a)(3).) Nonetheless, even in discovery proceedings, a party moving for leave to file records under seal must identify the specific information claimed to be entitled to confidentially and the nature of the harm threatened by disclosure. (See H.B. Fuller Co. v. Doe (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 879, 894.)

Where rule 2.550 applies, “[c]ourts have found that, under appropriate circumstances, various statutory privileges, trade secrets, and privacy interests, when properly asserted and not waived, may constitute overriding interests.” (In re Providian Credit Card Cases (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 292, 298, fn. 3.) In addition, 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. (See Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Superior Court (Unity Pictures Corp.) (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1273, 1285-1286.)

Where some material within a document warrants sealing, but other material does not, the document should be edited or redacted if possible, to accommodate both the moving party’s overriding interest and the strong presumption in favor of public access. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.550(d)(4), (5).) In such a case, the moving party should take a line-by-line approach to the information in the document, rather than framing the issue to the court on an all-or-nothing basis. (In re Providian, supra, 96 Cal.App.4th at p. 309.)

II. Analysis

Apple moves to file under seal certain exhibits to the Declaration of Patrick N. Keegan filed in support of plaintiff’s motion for class certification. In support of its motions, Apple provides a declaration by its attorney stating that the exhibits contain valuable commercial and competitive information, namely, confidential business and technical information regarding Apple TV 2.0 and 3.0. Public disclosure of this information would give competitors an unfair advantage over Apple.

As described in the parties’ stipulation filed on March 19, 2019 and plaintiff’s response to Apple’s motion to seal filed on April 22, 2019, Apple inadvertently failed to file a motion to seal these materials by the July 6, 2018 deadline previously ordered by the Court. However, the documents remain under seal on the Court’s docket, with the exception of Exhibit 8, which does not appear to have been lodged on the Court’s docket at all.

The information at issue remains confidential and is appropriately filed under seal. Apple’s request is also limited to appropriate exhibits. The factors set forth in rule 2.550(d) are satisfied under the circumstances.

III. Conclusion and Order

Apple’s motion to seal is GRANTED. Within 30 calendar days of the filing of this order, the parties shall file under seal a copy of Exhibit 8 to the Declaration of Patrick N. Keegan filed in support of plaintiff’s motion for class certification.

The Court will prepare the order.