DB Homes Designs, LLC v. Wilhelm

Background

DB Home Designs, LLC asked the court to keep Exhibits D and G under seal. The exhibits were filed with the plaintiff’s motion in limine. The plaintiff described the case as involving trade secrets and argued that the exhibits contained sensitive business information.

Court’s analysis

Court filings are generally presumed to be open to the public. The court stated that sealing or redacting a filing must be narrowly tailored to serve the reason offered for secrecy. The court also noted that the parties’ agreement to keep information confidential, or a confidentiality agreement between the litigants, is not by itself enough to overcome the public-access presumption.

The order states that the plaintiff’s letter motion, docketed at Document 80, did not adequately explain why Exhibits D and G should be sealed or show that sealing them was narrowly tailored to protect the claimed confidential information. The order referred the plaintiff to Rule 5(B) of the judge’s Individual Practices and to paragraph 10 of the stipulated confidentiality agreement and order, docketed at ECF No. 43.

Disposition

Judge Phillip M. Halpern denied the plaintiff’s sealing letter motion without prejudice. The order said that Exhibits D and G were not entitled to a protective order allowing them to remain sealed, and directed the clerk to terminate the letter motion at Document 80. Because the order denied the request without prejudice, the opinion does not state that the plaintiff is barred from making another request.

Uncertainty

Parts of the provided opinion text are corrupted or obscured. The summary relies on the readable portions stating that the sealing request was denied without prejudice, that Exhibits D and G were not entitled to sealing, and that Document 80 should be terminated.