True Health Chiropractic Inc v. McKesson Corporation
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:13-cv-02219
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In True Health Chiropractic v. McKesson, Judge Gilliam granted defendants’ motion to seal exhibits containing customer information.
The ruling affects defendants’ exhibits containing personally identifiable customer information and limits public access to those documents. It does not decide defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment.
What happened
In True Health Chiropractic Inc. v. McKesson Corporation, defendants asked to seal several exhibits supporting their motion to decertify the class and their motion for partial summary judgment. The exhibits included spreadsheets containing personally identifiable information about defendants’ customers.
The court applied the heightened “compelling reasons” standard because the filings were more than only slightly related to the case’s underlying claims. It found that the customer information was nonpublic, competitively sensitive, and generally qualified as trade-secret information, while the public interest in seeing the specific spreadsheets was limited.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted defendants’ administrative motion to seal. The documents covered by the ruling will remain under seal; the court deferred ruling on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment.
The detailed version
- True Health Chiropractic Inc v. McKesson Corporation · No. 4:13-cv-02219
- Haywood Gilliam
- Dec. 24, 2020
Background
Defendants filed an administrative motion to seal several exhibits submitted in support of their motion to decertify the class and their concurrently filed motion for partial summary judgment. The exhibits included nonpublic spreadsheets containing personally identifiable information for defendants’ customers.
Legal standard
For court records filed with motions that are closely related to the merits of a case, the court generally applies a “compelling reasons” standard. Under that standard, the party seeking secrecy must identify specific reasons that outweigh the public’s general right to inspect court records. Civil Local Rule 79-5 also requires the request to be narrowly tailored and supported by a showing that the material is privileged, a trade secret, or otherwise legally protected.
Court’s reasoning
The court determined that defendants’ filings connected to the class-decertification motion were more than tangentially related to the underlying claims, so the compelling-reasons standard applied. The court found that defendants met their burden because the spreadsheets contained nonpublic, competitively sensitive customer information. It also found that this information generally constituted trade secrets, that the public interest in releasing the particular spreadsheets was limited, and that defendants had a strong interest in keeping potentially trade-secret information confidential. Balancing those interests, the court concluded that the information should remain sealed.
Ruling
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted defendants’ administrative sealing motion. Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(f)(1), the documents covered by the granted motion will remain under seal. The opinion states that the court deferred ruling on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.