Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 144 Filed 06/06/22 Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`LYFT, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC,
`et al.,
`
`Case No. 21-cv-04653-BLF
`
`
`ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION
`REGARDING PROPOSED
`REDACTIONS TO COURT’S SEALED
`ORDER
`
`Defendants.
`
`[Re: ECF No. 136]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`On May 19, 2022, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiff Lyft, Inc.’s (“Lyft”) Motion
`
`for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. See ECF No. 133. The Court conditionally sealed the
`
`order since it referenced materials that were filed under seal, directing the parties to file a stipulated
`
`request for redactions. See ECF No. 134. On May 24, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation with a
`
`proposed redacted version of the Court’s order. See ECF No. 136. On May 25, 2022, the Court
`
`directed the parties to submit declarations in support of the confidentiality of the information
`
`underlying the proposed redactions. See ECF No. 137. On May 27, 2022, Defendant AGIS
`
`Software Development LLC (“AGIS Software”) submitted a declaration from its counsel Vincent
`
`J. Rubino, III in support of the proposed redactions. See Rubino Decl., ECF No. 142. On May 31,
`
`2022, Lyft submitted a declaration from counsel indicating that it “takes no position” with regard to
`
`the confidentiality of the information for which the parties proposed redactions. See Salpietra Decl.,
`
`ECF No. 143.
`
`“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and
`
`documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu,
`
`447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589,
`
`597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are “more than
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 144 Filed 06/06/22 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of “compelling
`
`reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101–02 (9th Cir.
`
`2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed upon a lesser showing
`
`of “good cause.” Id. at 1097.
`
`The information for which the parties proposed redactions falls into three main categories:
`
`(1) information regarding a AGIS Software license agreements (ECF No. 133 at 2:16–17, 4:17–18,
`
`4:28); (2) information regarding the structure of AGIS Software and AGIS, Inc. and AGIS Holdings,
`
`Inc. (ECF No. 133 at 3:12–14, 3:16–17, 3:19, 3:22, 3:27–28, 4:1–2). With respect to the information
`
`regarding the license agreement, Mr. Rubino’s declaration indicates that the information at issue is
`
`covered by confidentiality provisions in the agreements that would be breached if the information
`
`were revealed. See Rubino Decl., ECF No. 142 at 1. Further, Mr. Rubino indicates that making the
`
`information public would be harmful to the third parties who entered into those agreements, since it
`
`would reveal confidential licensing information to competitors. See id. at 1. With respect to the
`
`information
`
`regarding
`
`the structure and
`
`funds of AGIS Software, AGIS
`
`Inc. and
`
`AGIS Holdings, Inc., Mr. Rubino indicates that the information is confidential business
`
`information, including information regarding the contents of agreements between entities. See id.
`
`at 2.
`
`As an initial matter, the Court finds that the “good cause” standard applies here, since the
`
`parties seek to seal information in connection with the Court’s order on Lyft’s Motion to File First
`
`Amended Complaint, which is only tangentially related to the merits of this case. See Ctr. for Auto
`
`Safety, 809 F.3d at 1097.
`
`Further, the Court finds that AGIS Software has shown good cause for keeping the proposed
`
`redacted information under seal. The proposed redactions pertain to confidential business and
`
`licensing information, and AGIS Software has provided evidence that publicly disclosing this
`
`information would harm AGIS Software and third parties. See In re Electronic Arts,
`
`298 Fed.Appx. 568, 569 (9th Cir. 2008) (finding compelling reasons for sealing “business
`
`information that might harm a litigant’s competitive strategy”); Nicolosi Distributing, Inc. v.
`
`Finishmaster, Inc., No. 18–cv–03587–BLF, 2018 WL 10758114, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 28, 2018)
`
`2
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:21-cv-04653-BLF Document 144 Filed 06/06/22 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`(“[C]ompelling reasons exist [to seal three contracts] because they contain proprietary and
`
`confidential business information, including potential trade secrets and business practices, such as
`
`product rates and purchase requirements.”); ”); In re Google Location Hist. Litig.,
`
`514 F.Supp.3d 1147, 1162 (N.D. Cal. 2021).
`
`Accordingly, the parties’ stipulation regarding redactions to the Court’s sealed order at ECF
`
`No. 133 is hereby GRANTED. The Court will file the proposed redacted version of its sealed order
`
`shortly.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: June 6, 2022
`
`
`
`______________________________________
`BETH LABSON FREEMAN
`United States District Judge
`
`3
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`
`United States District Court
`
`