Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled May 26, 2021

Brown v. Google LLC

Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Docket
4:20-cv-03664
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Brown v. Google LLC, Magistrate Judge Van Keulen granted Google’s request to seal narrowly identified transcript portions protecting confidential internal information.

Who this affects

Google, the plaintiffs, and members of the public seeking access to the hearing transcript.

What happened

Brown v. Google LLC involved Google’s request to seal portions of the transcript from an April 29, 2021 discovery hearing. The parties made a joint submission about the request.

The court applied the lower “good cause” standard because the transcript concerned discovery rather than the merits of the case. It granted the request as to specified redacted portions, finding that the redactions were narrowly tailored to protect confidential information about Google’s internal systems, operations, identifiers, cookies, and data logs.

Magistrate Judge Susan Van Keulen entered the order on May 26, 2021. The order sealed only the listed redacted transcript portions.

The detailed version

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

Case
Brown v. Google LLC · No. 4:20-cv-03664
Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Date
May 26, 2021

Background

The court considered the parties’ joint submission regarding sealing portions of the April 29, 2021 discovery-hearing transcript. Google requested that portions of the transcript be sealed.

Court records are generally presumed open to the public. The court explained that the standard for sealing depends on how the records relate to the case. Records connected to motions concerning the merits generally require “compelling reasons” for secrecy. Records connected to discovery-related motions that are not about the merits are subject to the lower “good cause” standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). A sealing request must also follow the procedures in Civil Local Rule 79-5.

Ruling

The court held that the good-cause standard applied because the information was submitted in connection with a discovery-related motion rather than a motion concerning the merits of the case. The court GRANTED sealing as to the redacted portions of the April 29, 2021 discovery-hearing transcript at 6:17, 6:19, 7:6-7, 9:22, 12:3, 12:6-9, 12:11-12, 13:23, 15:10, 17:20-21, 18:8-9, 22:14-15, 22:16-20, 26:9, 26:18, and 26:19. It found the redactions narrowly tailored to protect confidential information about Google’s internal systems and operations, including internally used identifiers and cookies, their proprietary functions, and the types of data logs Google maintains.

Judge

Magistrate Judge Susan Van Keulen issued the order and dated it May 26, 2021.

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.