Brown v. Google LLC
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:20-cv-03664
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Brown v. Google LLC, Judge Van Keulen granted Google’s request to seal specified confidential discovery materials under the good-cause standard.
Google LLC and public access to the specified court-record materials.
What happened
In Brown v. Google LLC, the court considered Google’s request to seal materials filed in connection with discovery disputes. The court explained that court records generally carry a strong presumption of public access.
Because the materials concerned a discovery-related motion rather than the merits of the case, the court applied the lower “good cause” standard. It found good cause to seal specified portions of Google’s submission, which contained confidential information about Google’s internal systems, databases, logs, encryption practices, system designs, and business practices.
Judge Van Keulen granted the motion as to the listed portions of the submission, covering specified lines on several pages. The order said public disclosure could affect Google’s competitive position and increase cybersecurity risks.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Google LLC · No. 4:20-cv-03664
- Yvonne Rogers
- July 15, 2022
Background
The court considered Google LLC’s administrative motion to file under seal materials associated with discovery disputes. The motion concerned Google’s submission responding to docket entry 604.
Legal standard
The court explained that judicial records generally carry a strong presumption of public access. The standard for overcoming that presumption depends on how the records are used. Records connected to motions more than tangentially related to the underlying claims require “compelling reasons” for sealing. Records connected to motions not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits are governed by the lower “good cause” standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). A sealing request must also comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5.
Court’s ruling
The court applied the good-cause standard because the information was submitted in connection with a discovery-related motion rather than a motion concerning the merits of the case. It granted the motion as to specified portions of Google’s submission: pages 1:15–16, 1:19–2:3, 2:5, 2:10–13, 2:21–23, 2:25–26, and 2:28.
The court found that those portions contained Google’s confidential and proprietary information about sensitive features of its internal systems and operations, including databases, logs, encryption practices, proprietary functionalities, internal strategies, system designs, and business practices. The court stated that Google maintained this information as confidential in the ordinary course of business and that it was not generally known to the public or Google’s competitors. It also found that public disclosure could affect Google’s competitive standing and increase cybersecurity risks.
The order cautioned that the court could reach different conclusions about sealing the documents under different standards or in a different context. It then ordered the specified portions sealed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.