Vedanti Licensing Limited, LLC v. Google LLC

Background

In connection with Google LLC’s motion for attorney fees, Google asked to file portions of its brief and the accompanying declaration of Robert W. Unikel under seal. The information Google sought to protect included the amount of fees it requested and the number of hours its counsel worked.

Legal standard

The court explained that judicial records generally carry a strong presumption of public access. But when records are only indirectly related to the merits of a case, a party seeking to seal them must meet the lower “good cause” standard under Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Good cause requires more than unsupported assertions that disclosure could cause harm.

Court’s analysis

Google argued that public disclosure of its litigation expenditures could disadvantage it in licensing and settlement negotiations. Google also argued that competitors could learn what it paid for legal services and that prospective counsel could use Google’s rates to demand higher fees.

The court found these arguments speculative and unsupported by factual evidence. It noted that information about attorney rates in the district was already widely available. The court also observed that Google had not sought to seal similar information in other cases involving attorney-fee requests and did not identify cases in which courts had sealed the fee amount and attorney hours in a fee motion.

Ruling

Judge Edward J. Davila denied Google’s administrative motion to file under seal. The court ordered Google to file an unredacted version of its fee motion and the Unikel Declaration on the public docket by August 9, 2021. The opinion did not decide whether Google was entitled to the attorney fees it requested.