`Case 2:21-cv-01953-APG-EJY Document 101 Filed 12/12/23 Page 1 of 2
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`ISTRICT OF NEVADA
`
`* * *
`
`
`Case No. 2:21-cv-01953-APG-EJY
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`RES EXHIBIT SERVICES, LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`
`LNW GAMING, INC. f/k/a SG GAMING,
`INC. f/k/a BALLY GAMING, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`Pending before the Court is Defendant LNW Gaming, Inc.’s Motion to Redact its Opposition
`
`to the Motion to Stay Pending Criminal Investigation and Seal Exhibits C-M Thereto. ECF No. 94.
`On December 6, 2021, the Court entered an order requiring, inter alia, the resubmission of redacted
`versions of Plaintiff and Counterdefendants’ Motions at ECF Nos. 85 and 87 (the redacted Motions
`to Stay the Case and to Seal the Motion to Stay the Case respectively). ECF No. 91. The instruction
`stated that redactions should be made solely to discussions of the scope, substance, subject matter or
`direction of the criminal investigation. Id. This was not an invitation to redact more information,
`but less. To the extent the Court’s Order was not clear, the Court makes that instruction clear in this
`Order. Specifically, and by way of example, not one of the redactions on pages 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 of
`ECF No. 93 is proper. None of the discussions in those redacted representations discuss the scope,
`substantive subject matter or direction of a criminal investigation. The discussions pertain to
`discovery in a civil dispute. The Court reiterates that “a litigant who might be embarrassed,
`incriminated, or exposed to litigation through dissemination of materials is not, without more,
`entitled to the court’s protection” through a sealing order. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.,
`331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal citation omitted).
`
`With respect to Exhibits H-I and M—grand jury subpoenas—these are and shall remain
`sealed. The remainder of the redacted information must be reexamined and refiled by LNW.
`
`1
`
`

`

`
`Case 2:21-cv-01953-APG-EJY Document 101 Filed 12/12/23 Page 2 of 2
`
`
`Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that LNW Gaming Inc.’s Motions to Redact its
`
`Opposition to the Motion to Stay Pending Criminal Investigation and Seal Exhibits C-M Thereto
`(ECF No. 94) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Response at ECF No. 95 will remain sealed.
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Exhibits H, I, and M to ECF No. 95 are and will remain
`sealed.
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that LNW Gaming must refile the redacted versions of its
`
`Opposition to the Motion to Stay Pending Criminal Investigation (ECF No. 93), together with
`Exhibits other than those identified as properly sealed above, removing all redactions that do not
`expressly discuss the scope of a criminal investigation or the substance and direction of a criminal
`investigation. Civil proceedings that do not discuss these subject matters are not properly sealed.
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that nothing in this Order changes the due dates for responses
`or replies to pending substantive motions.
`DATED this 12th day of December, 2023.
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`