`
`Brent O. Hatch (5715)
`Hatch Law Group, PC
`22 E. 100 S. Suite 400
`Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
`Telephone: (801) 869-1919
`hatch@hatchpc.com
`
`Attorney for Defendant – Additional counsel listed in signature
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
`
`
`
`EAGLE VIEW TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and
`PICTOMETRY INTERNATIONAL CORP.,
`
`
`
` Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`NEARMAP US, INC.,
`
`
`
` Defendant.
`
`
`DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SEAL
`DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO
`DUCivR 5-3
`
`Seal Plaintiff’s First Amended
`Complaint and Exhibit 31 Thereto
`
`Case No.: 2:21-cv-00283
`
`Judge: Ted Stewart
`
`Magistrate Judge: Daphne A. Oberg
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to DUCivR 5-3, Defendant Nearmap US, Inc. (“Nearmap”) respectfully moves
`
`this Court for leave to file under seal Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“Amended
`
`Complaint”) and Exhibit 31 thereto.
`
`The Court may at any time order all or a portion of the documents filed in a pending civil
`
`case to be sealed for good cause. DUCivR 5-3. “[A] court, in its discretion, may seal documents
`
`‘if the public’s right of access is outweighed by competing interests.’” United States v. Hickey,
`
`767 F.2d 705, 708 (10th Cir. 1985). “Documents can only be sealed on motion and with a
`
`showing of ‘good cause.’” AH Aero Serv., LLC v. Heber City, Case No. 2:17-CV-01118, 2020
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00283-TS-DAO Document 277 Filed 04/04/23 PageID.17029 Page 2 of 4
`
`WL 6135819, at *2 (D. Utah Oct. 19, 2020). There is good cause for the Court to seal
`
`documents that “contain information that is highly sensitive and of a proprietary nature.” Braun
`
`v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 719 Fed. Appx. 782, 801 n.8 (10th Cir. 2017) (citing Nixon v.
`
`Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)).
`
`There is good cause to enter an order restricting public access to, and/or sealing the
`
`Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31 thereto. Specifically, the Court should restrict public access
`
`because Nearmap’s countervailing interest in preserving the confidentiality of its commercially
`
`sensitive information outweighs the limited public interest in access.
`
`The Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31 thereto contain sensitive technical information,
`
`competitive technical information, sensitive business information, and competitive business
`
`information that is CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION – ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY pursuant
`
`to the Standard Protective Order. See DUCivR 26-2. Accordingly, Nearmap requests that the
`
`Court seal these documents pursuant to DUCivR 5-3.
`
`The Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31 thereto contain commercially sensitive
`
`information that may be damaging to Nearmap if made available to the public, including its
`
`competitors. Thus, the Court should afford limited weight to the presumption of public access
`
`under the circumstances. There are countervailing interests that outweigh the public’s limited
`
`interest in access to the Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31 thereto filed in this private
`
`commercial dispute.
`
`Further, “the public’s right of access is outweighed by” the possible competitive harm to
`
`Nearmap from public disclosure of its commercially sensitive information. Finally, the relief
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00283-TS-DAO Document 277 Filed 04/04/23 PageID.17030 Page 3 of 4
`
`sought through this motion is narrowly tailored under the circumstances because Nearmap does
`
`not seek to seal the entire case.
`
`Because there are compelling reasons to keep under seal the Amended Complaint and
`
`Exhibit 31 thereto, which contains confidential information, and because Nearmap is requesting
`
`to seal only the documents necessary to protect Nearmap’s substantial commercial interests, the
`
`Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31 thereto should be sealed.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`Nearmap respectfully requests leave to file the Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31
`
`thereto under seal. Nearmap further requests that the Court restrict public access to and/or seal
`
`the Amended Complaint and Exhibit 31 thereto.
`
`
`
`Submitted this 4th day of April, 2023
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Brent O. Hatch
`Brent O. Hatch
`HATCH LAW GROUP, PC
`
`
`
`
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`Nicholas Groombridge
`Jennifer H. Wu
`Jenny C. Wu
`Jennifer Rea Deneault
`Scott E. Miller
`GROOMBRIDGE, WU,
` BAUGHMAN & STONE LLP
`565 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900
`New York, New York 10017
`332-269-0030 (telephone)
`nick.groombridge@groombridgewu.com
`jennifer.wu@groombridgewu.com
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-00283-TS-DAO Document 277 Filed 04/04/23 PageID.17031 Page 4 of 4
`
`jenny.wu@groombridgewu.com
`jenna.deneault@groombridgewu.com
`scott.miller@groombridgewu.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant Nearmap US, Inc.
`
`