Rothy's, Inc. v. Birdies, Inc.
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:21-cv-02438
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Rothy’s v. Birdies, Magistrate Judge Tse denied Birdies’s motion to seal because Birdies did not show specific harm from disclosure.
Birdies’s motion to keep the information sealed was denied. Rothy’s was required to file unredacted public versions of the exhibits, affecting public access to those materials.
What happened
Rothy’s, Inc. v. Birdies, Inc. concerned Birdies’s request to keep confidential information attached to the parties’ joint statement from public view. Birdies argued that the information should remain sealed.
The court found that Birdies had not shown that publicly disclosing the information would cause specific harm. It denied the motion to seal and ordered Rothy’s to file unredacted public versions of the exhibits by February 1, 2022.
Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse issued the order on January 25, 2022.
The detailed version
- Rothy's, Inc. v. Birdies, Inc. · No. 3:21-cv-02438
- Vince Chhabria
- Jan. 25, 2022
Background
Birdies moved to seal confidential information attached to the parties’ joint statement. Rothy’s had provisionally filed the information under seal.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied the requirement that a party seeking to seal court records show that “specific prejudice or harm will result” from public disclosure. The court concluded that Birdies had not persuaded it that disclosure of the information would cause that type of harm.
Ruling
The court denied Birdies’s motion to seal. It ordered Rothy’s to file unredacted public versions of the exhibits at issue by February 1, 2022. Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse signed the order on January 25, 2022.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.