Dekker v. Vivint Solar, Inc.

Background

This order addressed the defendants’ motion to seal materials submitted with the plaintiff’s reply supporting her motion under Rule 36(b) to amend admissions. The plaintiff had lodged the exhibits conditionally under seal, and the defendants filed a declaration supporting the sealing of some of the material.

The court explained that court records are generally open to the public. Under Ninth Circuit standards, materials more than tangentially related to the merits may be sealed only for compelling reasons, while materials only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed for good cause.

Ruling

The court granted the sealing requests for specified portions of three exhibits:

- Exhibit E, an expert report by Bruce McFarlane. The requested portions included specified paragraphs, footnotes, and figures. The court found the redactions narrowly tailored and directed to specific, sensitive information from a third-party appraisal of Vivint’s solar-panel installations. It further found that disclosure could injure Vivint’s competitive standing. - Exhibit F, a reply report by Leland Price. The court granted the request for the portions identified by the defendants and referred to the ruling for Exhibit E. - Exhibit G, excerpts of Bruce McFarlane’s deposition testimony. The court granted the request for pages 25:1–178:16 and referred to the ruling for Exhibit E.

The parties were ordered to refile all relevant documents in full compliance with the order no later than 14 days from the order’s date. This order addressed sealing only; the opinion does not state a ruling on the underlying motion to amend admissions.