Quintara Biosciences, Inc. v. Ruifeng Biztech Inc.

[5] 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT [7] NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA [9] 10 QUINTARA BIOSCIENCES, INC., 11 Plaintiff, No. C 20-04808 WHA 12 v. 13 RUIFENG BIZTECH INC., et al., ORDER RE MOTIONS TO SEAL 14 Defendants. [16] 17 There is a strong public policy in favor of openness in our court system and the public is 18 entitled to know to whom we are providing relief (or not). See Kamakana v. City & Cty. of 19 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 , 1178–80 (9th Cir. 2006). Consequently, access to motions and their 20 attachments that are “more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only 21 upon a showing of “compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 22 LLC, 809 F.3d 1092 , 1101–02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the 23 merits may be sealed upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097 . The compelling 24 reasons standard applies to most judicial records. Evidentiary motions such as motions in 25 limine and Daubert motions can be strongly correlative to the merits of a case. Id. at 1098– 26 1100. 27 In addition, sealing motions filed in this district must be “narrowly tailored to seek 1 whole or in part must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is sealable. Civ. 2 L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). For example, “[t]he publication of materials that could result in 3 infringement upon trade secrets has long been considered a factor that would overcome [the] 4 strong presumption” in favor of access and provide compelling reasons for sealing. Apple Inc. 5 v. Psystar Corp., 658 F.3d 1150, 1162 (9th Cir. 2011). Compelling reasons may also warrant 6 sealing for “sources of business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing,” 7 especially where the public has “minimal interest” in the information because it “is not 8 necessary to the public's understanding of the case.” See Nixon v. Warner Comms., Inc., 435 9 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). 10 “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain 11 documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are 12 sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). “Supporting declarations may not rely on vague 13 boilerplate language or nebulous assertions of potential harm but must explain with 14 particularity why any document or portion thereof remains sealable under the applicable legal 15 standard.” Bronson v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc., 2019 WL 7810811 , at *1 (N.D. Cal. May 28, 16 2019) (citing Civ. L.R. 79-5). 17 Upon review of the pertinent motions to seal and their accompanying declarations, this 18 order finds the parties have made the requisite showing to seal certain portions of the submitted 19 documents. The proposed redactions are narrowly tailored. Without deciding on whether the 20 asserted trade secrets ultimately qualify as trade secrets, this order rules as follows: 21 Dkt. Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning No. [22] 44-1 Quintara’s Amended GRANTED. Although a previous order permitted 23 Trade Secret Disclosure Quintara to file this document under seal (Dkt. No. 40), this order 24 confirms that this document contains material asserted to constitute trade [25] secrets. [27] 51-4 Defendants’ Motion for DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this [1] Protective Order material lodged conditionally under 2 Pending Plaintiff’s seal (Dkt. No. 52). Identification of Trade 3 Secrets [4] 51-6 Quintara’s Amended GRANTED. See entry for Dkt. No. 44-1. 5 Trade Secret Disclosure [7] 8 51-8 Quintara’s Amended GRANTED. See entry for Dkt. No. 44-1. Trade Secret Disclosure [11] 56-2 Wiseman Decl. ISO GRANTED Granted as to Wiseman Decl. Exh. 12 Defendants’ Motion to as to the A: lines 12 and 21 on page 9; and Strike requested Lines 17 and 21 on page 11. This 13 material. material contains material asserted to constitute trade secrets (Dkt. No. [14] 58) 15 56-6 Defendants’ Motion to DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal any of Strike the material lodged conditionally 16 under seal (Dkt. No. 58) [18] 56-8 Wiseman Decl. ISO GRANTED See entry for Dkt. No. 56-2. 19 Defendants’ Motion to as to the Strike requested [20] material. [21] 22 Defendants’ Motion GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 145-3 ISO Motion for as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 23 Terminating or Issue requested Declaration contains information Sanctions and all material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, [24] supporting as well as confidential customer and 25 documentation vendor information, the public disclosure of which would cause 26 Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 148-1). [27] Nova Declaration ISO GRANTED See entry for Dkt. No. 145-3. 1 145-4 Defendants’ Motion for as to the 2 Terminating or Issue requested Sanctions material. [4] 165-4 Motion for Partial DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this 5 Summary Judgment and material lodged conditionally under all supporting seal (Dkt. No. 166). 6 documentation (Part 1) [7] 8 165-5 Motion for Partial GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Summary Judgment and as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 9 all supporting requested Declaration contains information documentation (Part 2) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 10 as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain [11] sensitive financial information, the 12 public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 13 (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). Motion for Partial GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 14 165-6 Summary Judgment and as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson all supporting requested Declaration contains information [15] documentation (Part 3) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 16 as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain 17 sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of which would 18 cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). [19] 165-7 Novoa Declaration ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 20 Motion for Summary as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Adjudication requested Declaration contains information 21 material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, as well as confidential customer and [22] vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the [23] public disclosure of which would 24 cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 25 165-9 Wiseman Declaration DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this ISO Motion for Partial material lodged conditionally under [26] Summary Judgment seal (Dkt. No. 166). 27 (declaration only) 165-10 Wiseman Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as [1] ISO Motion for Partial as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 2 Summary Judgment requested Declaration contains information (exhibits A–S) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 3 as well as Quintara’s confidential customer and vendor information 4 and certain sensitive financial information, the public disclosure of [5] which would cause Quintara 6 competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 7 165-11 Wiseman Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as ISO Motion for Partial as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 8 Summary Judgment requested Declaration contains information (exhibits T–BB) material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, [9] as well as confidential customer and 10 vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the 11 public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 12 (see Table I, Dkt. No. 166). 168-2 Defendants’ Motion to GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as [13] Exclude and Disqualify as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 14 Expert Tomo Kimura requested Declaration contains information and all supporting material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 15 documentation as well as confidential customer and vendor information and certain [16] sensitive financial information, the 17 public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 18 (see Table I, Dkt. No. 172). 168-6 Defendants’ Motion to DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this 19 Exclude and Disqualify material lodged conditionally under Expert Tomo Kimura seal (Dkt. No. 172). [21] 22 168-8 Wiseman Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as ISO Defendants’ as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson [23] Motion to Exclude and requested Declaration contains information 24 Disqualify Expert material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, Tomo Kimura as well as confidential customer and 25 vendor information and certain sensitive financial information, the 26 public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm [27] (see Table I, Dkt. No. 172). 170-4 Li Declaration ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as [1] Plaintiff’s Opposition to as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 2 Motion for Partial requested Declaration contains information Summary Judgment material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 3 the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 4 (see Table I, Dkt. No.170-1). [5] Defendants also seek to seek to seal 6 material that contains confidential financial information, the public 7 disclosure of which would cause defendants competitive harm 8 (Wiseman Decl, Dkt. No. 171). 177-4 Defendants’ Reply ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as [9] Motion for Summary as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 10 Adjudication and all requested Declaration contains information supporting documents material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 11 (Part 1) the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 12 (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1). [13] 177-5 Defendants’ Reply ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 14 Motion for Summary as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Adjudication and all requested Declaration contains information 15 supporting documents material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, (Part 2) the public disclosure of which would [16] cause Quintara competitive harm 17 (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1). 18 177-7 Li Declaration in GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as Support of Defendants’ as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 19 Motion for Summary requested Declaration contains information Adjudication material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, [20] the public disclosure of which would 21 cause Quintara competitive harm (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1). [22] 177-9 Wang Declaration in GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 23 Support of Defendants’ as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson Motion for Summary requested Declaration contains information [24] Adjudication material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 25 the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 26 (see Table I, Dkt. No.179-1). [27] 201-4 J. James Li Declaration GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as [1] ISO Plaintiff’s Motion as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 2 for Issue, Evidentiary, requested Declaration contains information and Monetary Sanctions material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 3 the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 4 (see Table I, Dkt. No. 201-1). 206-4 Defendants’ Opposition GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as [5] to Plaintiff’s Motion for as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson 6 Issue and Evidentiary requested Declaration contains information Sanctions and all material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, 7 supporting documents the public disclosure of which would cause Quintara competitive harm 8 (see Table I, Dkt. No. 200). 206-6 Li Declaration ISO Plaintiff did not seek to seal this 9 DENIED. Defendants’ Opposition material lodged conditionally under 10 to Plaintiff’s Motion for seal (Dkt. No. 209). Issue and Evidentiary 11 Sanctions [12] 206-8 Wang Declaration ISO DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this 13 Defendants’ Opposition material lodged conditionally under to Plaintiff’s Motion for seal (Dkt. No. 209). 14 Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions [15] 16 206-10 Ng Declaration ISO DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this Defendants’ Opposition material lodged conditionally under 17 to Plaintiff’s Motion for seal (Dkt. No. 209). Issue and Evidentiary 18 Sanctions [19] 206-12 Novoa Declaration ISO GRANTED Material requested to be sealed as 20 Defendants’ Opposition as to the listed in Table I of the Peterson to Plaintiff’s Motion for requested Declaration contains information 21 Issue and Evidentiary material. allegedly constituting trade secrets, Sanctions the public disclosure of which would [22] cause Quintara competitive harm 23 (see Table I, Dkt. No. 200). 206-14 Wiseman Declaration DENIED. Plaintiff did not seek to seal this 24 ISO Defendants’ material lodged conditionally under Opposition to Plaintiff’s seal (Dkt. No. 209). [25] Motion for Issue and 26 Evidentiary Sanctions [27] 1 Within TWENTY-EIGHT DAYS of the date of this order, the parties must, to the extent 2 needed, file documents in full compliance with this order. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. [4] 5 Dated: March 8, 2022. 6 Pee 7 [ A = WILLIAM ALSUP 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE [10] ll a 12 [16] € = 17 Zz 18