In re Google RTB Consumer Privacy Litigation

Background

Google filed an administrative motion to seal portions of an interrogatory response that it submitted, at the court’s direction, as an exhibit to a supplemental filing concerning a discovery dispute. The plaintiffs did not respond to the motion.

Google argued that the material identified internal systems and advertising infrastructure, including system design and capabilities, as well as sensitive and proprietary technical names for internal data logs. Google asserted that disclosure could cause significant competitive harm and create cybersecurity risks. It also argued that the proposed redactions were consistent with information the court had sealed previously in the case.

Legal Standard

The court explained that judicial records accompanying dispositive motions generally receive a strong presumption of public access, which can be overcome only by compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings. But that presumption is weaker for matters only tangentially related to the merits. Because the discovery hearing did not address the merits of either side’s claims or defenses, the court applied the lower “good cause” standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c).

Ruling

The court found that Google had shown good cause. It concluded that the proposed redactions were minimal and narrowly tailored to protect against the potential harms identified by Google. The court ordered sealed the highlighted portions of Google’s June 8, 2023 supplemental objections and responses to the plaintiffs’ Fourth Set of Interrogatories, Nos. 13, 14, and 15, identified on pages 4–6 and 8 of Docket No. 573-2.

A redacted version of the document was already available on the public docket. The court therefore stated that no further action was required from the parties and granted the administrative motion to seal. Judge Virginia K. Demarchi signed the order.