Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled May 12, 2021

Troyer v. The Yerba Mate Co., LLP

Judge
William Alsup
Docket
3:20-cv-06065
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Casey Troyer v. The Yerba Mate Co., LLC, Judge Alsup denied Troyer’s motion to seal two class-certification exhibits because it covered entire spreadsheets.

Who this affects

Casey Troyer’s request to seal two exhibits was denied; the ruling also concerns public access to those court records.

What happened

Casey Troyer asked the court to keep two spreadsheets supporting his request to certify a class from public view. The spreadsheets contained invoice lists and records tracking location, app use, and customer information.

Troyer argued that the defendants had marked the exhibits confidential under a protective order and might consider them trade secrets. The court said this explanation did not justify sealing the entire spreadsheets, especially because only small portions contained customer names and locations.

Judge William Alsup denied the motion. The court explained that only information supported by specific reasons for secrecy should be sealed, if any.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Troyer v. The Yerba Mate Co., LLP · No. 3:20-cv-06065
Judge
William Alsup
Date
May 12, 2021

Background

Casey Troyer moved to file two exhibits under seal in support of his motion for class certification. The exhibits were electronic spreadsheets containing lists of invoices and records from an application used in Troyer’s work. The application tracked location and use of the application, along with related customer information.

Troyer stated that the defendants had marked the exhibits confidential under a protective order and presumably considered them trade secrets. He also noted that a declaration from his expert repeated some information from the exhibits, including customer names and locations.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that court records generally have a strong presumption of public access. A party seeking to seal records must provide specific factual reasons that overcome that presumption. The court recognized that business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing can sometimes justify sealing.

The court held that Troyer’s explanation was insufficient. It stated that, even if customer names and locations qualified as business information that could harm competitive standing—which the court described as doubtful—only those portions should be sealed. Troyer had instead sought to seal the entire spreadsheets, even though only small portions contained customer names and locations.

Disposition

The court denied the motion to file the two exhibits under seal. Judge William Alsup signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.