SkyWater Technology Foundry, Inc. v. Clark Street Associates, LLC
- Beth Freeman
- 5:20-cv-03168
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In SkyWater Technology Foundry v. Clark Street Associates, Judge Van Keulen granted motions to seal specified discovery materials based on good cause.
SkyWater Technology Foundry, Inc. and Clark Street Associates, LLC, as well as members of the public seeking access to the specified court filings.
What happened
SkyWater Technology Foundry, Inc. v. Clark Street Associates, LLC involved three requests to keep certain materials from the public record. The materials were submitted with a joint discovery letter brief and included interrogatory answers, document-request responses, and a consulting agreement.
The court applied the lower “good cause” standard because the materials concerned discovery rather than the merits of the case. SkyWater said the redacted information was subject to government disclosure controls and that some information related to national security.
Judge Van Keulen granted all three motions to seal, covering the specified highlighted portions of the documents. The order did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- SkyWater Technology Foundry, Inc. v. Clark Street Associates, LLC · No. 5:20-cv-03168
- Beth Freeman
- Dec. 15, 2020
Background
The court considered administrative motions to file documents under seal, docketed at Nos. 43, 47, and 48. The materials were submitted in connection with the parties’ December 3, 2020 joint discovery letter brief. They included SkyWater’s answers to Clark Street’s first set of interrogatories, SkyWater’s responses to Clark Street’s first set of requests for production, and the parties’ consulting agreement.
Legal standard
Court records generally have a strong presumption of public access. The court explained that requests involving records connected more than tangentially to the merits require “compelling reasons” for sealing. But records connected to discovery-related matters receive the lower “good cause” standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), because discovery motions do not concern the merits of the case.
Ruling
The court held that the good-cause standard applied. It granted the motions to seal as follows:
- Exhibit B to the joint discovery letter brief: The court granted sealing for the highlighted portions identified in Docket No. 47-2, consisting of specified lines on pages 5, 6, 17, and 18. SkyWater had designated the material confidential because it contained information about the United States Government subject to dissemination controls under federal statutes and regulations, agency directives, and contract documents. SkyWater provided evidence that it was not permitted to publicly disclose the material without the government’s prior knowledge or consent. - Exhibit F to the joint discovery letter brief: The court granted sealing for the specified highlighted portions identified in Docket No. 47-4. SkyWater cited the same dissemination controls and stated that some projects or technologies in the material related to national security, so public disclosure could have a detrimental impact on national security. - The consulting agreement: The court granted sealing for the specified highlighted portions identified in Docket No. 48-3. SkyWater represented that the material was protected by the same dissemination controls and that some referenced projects, programs, or technologies related to national security.
The order addressed access to specified court filings; it did not resolve the parties’ underlying dispute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.