In re Google Assistant Privacy Litigation

Background

Non-party Appen Butler Hill Inc. asked the court to seal documents filed in support of its motion seeking relief from a nondispositive pretrial order issued by Magistrate Judge van Keulen. Appen sought to seal the entire July 1, 2016 Statement of Work between Appen and Google LLC and Alphabet, Inc., as well as portions of its motion that quoted or summarized that document. No opposition was filed.

Legal standard

The court explained that court records generally are open to public inspection. Because the filings at issue were only tangentially related to the merits of the lawsuit, the court applied the less demanding “good cause” standard rather than requiring compelling reasons. The court also considered the requirements of Civil Local Rule 79-5, including identifying the interests supporting sealing, the injury that could result from disclosure, and why a less restrictive alternative would not be sufficient.

Reasoning and ruling

Appen argued that the documents contained extensive detail about its proprietary tools and customized services for Google, as well as detailed pricing information. A declaration from Appen’s Director of Client Services, Birkir Larusson, stated that the information was non-public and competitively sensitive because disclosure could reveal Appen’s proprietary tools, workflows, and price point. The court found that Appen met the good-cause standard.

The court GRANTED Appen’s sealing motion. It ordered the entire Statement of Work sealed and granted sealing for highlighted portions of Appen’s motion for relief, including the portions identified in the order.