Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 4, 2021

Advsr, LLC v. Magistro LTD.

Judge
Joseph Spero
Docket
3:19-cv-02670
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Advsr v. Magisto, Judge Spero granted Magisto’s sealing motion but denied Advsr’s motion and ordered public filing of the documents.

Who this affects

Advsr, LLC must publicly file the documents covered by its denied motion, while Magisto LTD.’s sealing request was granted. Yahal Zilka’s confidentiality designations were also discussed, and the ruling affects public access to the documents.

What happened

In Advsr, LLC v. Magisto LTD., et al., Magisto asked to seal portions of documents containing a confidential acquisition price and other sensitive financial information. Advsr also asked to seal documents based on confidentiality designations by Magisto and Yahal Zilka.

The court granted Magisto’s motion because it was narrowly tailored and supported by compelling reasons. The court denied Advsr’s motion because the defendants had not filed the required responsive declaration. Advsr was ordered to file the documents publicly without redactions between October 12 and October 18, 2021, unless the defendants filed their own motion to seal.

Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero issued the order on October 4, 2021. The order concerned only the parties’ requests to keep documents from the public record.

The detailed version

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

Case
Advsr, LLC v. Magistro LTD. · No. 3:19-cv-02670
Judge
Joseph Spero
Date
Oct. 4, 2021

Background

The order addressed administrative motions to file documents under seal in connection with motions for summary judgment. The court explained that documents connected to motions more than tangentially related to the merits may be sealed only for “compelling reasons.” Requests must also be narrowly tailored, which may require redacting only sensitive portions instead of sealing entire documents.

Rulings

Magisto moved to seal portions of several documents to prevent disclosure of a confidential corporate acquisition price and other sensitive financial information. The court found that Magisto’s request was narrowly tailored and supported by compelling reasons. The court therefore granted Magisto’s motion.

Advsr moved to seal documents based only on confidentiality designations made by Magisto and Yahal Zilka. The defendants did not file the responsive declaration required by Civil Local Rule 79-5(e). The court therefore denied Advsr’s motion and ordered Advsr to file the documents at issue unredacted in the public record no earlier than October 12, 2021, and no later than October 18, 2021, unless the defendants filed their own motion to seal the documents.

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.