Postpichal v. Cricket Wireless, LLC

Background

Cricket Wireless, LLC asked the court to keep several exhibits under seal. The exhibits had been filed in response to an earlier order concerning Cricket’s motion to compel arbitration. The plaintiffs’ underlying claims were brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Sealing standard

The court explained that judicial records are generally presumed to be open to the public. For records closely connected to the underlying claims, a party usually must show compelling reasons to overcome that presumption. For records unrelated or only tangentially related to the claims, the party may instead show good cause by identifying specific harm or prejudice that would result from disclosure.

The court found that the motion to compel arbitration was only tangentially related to the underlying claims because deciding whether the dispute could be arbitrated would not affect the plaintiffs’ claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Reasons for sealing

The court found good cause to seal Exhibit A to Gary Braxton’s declaration and Exhibits 1 through 7 to Ashish Pradhan’s declaration. The exhibits contained sensitive personal information about class members, including their full names, states of residence, and account numbers for services with Cricket. The court stated that the information could be used for improper purposes.

The court also found that the class members’ names and account information were necessary to determine whether they had consented to arbitration. It therefore concluded that redaction was not an adequate alternative to sealing the exhibits.

Disposition

Judge William Alsup granted Cricket’s motion to seal. The order did not decide whether the parties had agreed to arbitration or resolve the underlying claims.