DZ Reserve v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
- James Donato
- 3:18-cv-04978
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In DZ Reserve v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Judge Donato granted the parties’ motion to seal confidential information in more than 100 documents.
DZ Reserve and the other plaintiffs, Meta Platforms, Inc., third-party Amazing.com, and members of the public seeking access to the covered documents.
What happened
In DZ Reserve v. Meta Platforms, Inc., the parties jointly asked the court to seal portions of more than 100 documents. The documents mainly concerned DZ Reserve’s request to represent a class and motions involving expert witnesses. Amazing.com also asked to seal some information as a third party.
The court found that the parties had shown specific reasons why the information should remain private. The plaintiffs identified personal information and names of unrelated third parties. Meta identified source code, technical processes, product and system functions, business strategies, business dealings, and consumer behavior information that could cause competitive harm. Amazing.com identified proprietary business information about its online commerce activities that could cause competitive injury.
Judge James Donato granted the omnibus motion to seal. The order did not decide the class-certification or expert-witness motions themselves.
The detailed version
- DZ Reserve v. Meta Platforms, Inc. · No. 3:18-cv-04978
- James Donato
- Dec. 3, 2021
Background
The parties filed a joint omnibus motion to seal portions of more than 100 documents. An omnibus motion addresses multiple requests in a single filing. The documents related primarily to DZ Reserve’s motion for class certification and various motions to exclude expert witnesses; the court stated that those were not dispositive proceedings. Amazing.com, a third party, also submitted sealing requests.
Court’s Analysis
For materials sought to be sealed by the plaintiffs, the court found that they identified facts showing that the proposed redactions concerned individuals’ personal information and the names of unrelated third parties.
For materials sought to be sealed by Meta Platforms, Inc., the court found that Meta identified facts showing that the proposed redactions concerned proprietary source code, technical processes and product functions, business strategies, business dealings, and consumer behavior information. The court also found that Meta presented facts showing disclosure could cause competitive harm or give competitors an unfair advantage.
For materials sought to be sealed by Amazing.com, the court found that the proposed redactions concerned proprietary business information related to its online-commerce activities and that disclosure could cause competitive injury in the marketplace.
The court applied the standard requiring compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of public access and policies favoring disclosure.
Disposition
The court granted the omnibus motion to seal, Docket No. 325. The order did not rule on the underlying class-certification or expert-witness motions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.