In re Alphabet, Inc., Shareholder Derivative Litigation
- Lin
- 3:21-cv-09388
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate and have been consolidated across spelling variants.
In re Alphabet Shareholder Derivative Litigation: Judge Lin ordered Alphabet to explain why redacted complaint paragraphs should not be made public.
Alphabet, Inc., which was ordered to explain why the redacted paragraphs should remain sealed; the plaintiffs, whose amended complaint contains the redactions; and the public, because the court is considering whether the paragraphs should be made available.
What happened
In re Alphabet, Inc., Shareholder Derivative Litigation concerns a request to keep parts of the plaintiffs’ amended complaint and its redline version confidential. The redactions covered information that Alphabet had asked the plaintiffs to treat as confidential.
Alphabet supported the request, but the court said Alphabet had not shown strong enough reasons to keep the paragraphs sealed, particularly because they concerned the case’s merits. The court also questioned whether descriptions of board briefings and votes would actually discourage internal company discussions.
Judge Rita F. Lin ordered Alphabet to explain in writing by July 7, 2025 why the paragraphs should not be made public. The order did not itself unseal the paragraphs.
The detailed version
- In re Alphabet, Inc., Shareholder Derivative Litigation · No. 3:21-cv-09388
- Lin
- July 2, 2025
Background
On May 30, 2025, the plaintiffs filed a request asking the court to consider whether another party’s materials should remain under seal. Several paragraphs in the plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint and the related redline were redacted because they contained information that Alphabet, Inc. had asked the plaintiffs to treat as confidential. Alphabet later joined the request in support.
Court’s concerns
The court stated that Alphabet had not provided “compelling reasons” to keep the relevant paragraphs sealed, especially because the information was central to the merits of the case. The court cited the Ninth Circuit’s standard concerning requests to seal materials connected to the merits.
The court directed Alphabet to address two issues. First, Alphabet had described the information as confidential and sensitive business information and as information about highly sensitive ongoing regulatory matters. The court asked why those reasons remained compelling when the events described occurred at least five years earlier. Second, Alphabet argued that some paragraphs concerned confidential board deliberations. The court asked why publicly disclosing general descriptions of board briefings and votes, without identifying individual board members, would have a chilling effect on internal company deliberations.
Order
The court ordered Alphabet to show cause in writing by July 7, 2025 why the paragraphs should not be unsealed. The order did not state that the paragraphs were immediately unsealed or finally rule on the sealing request.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.