Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc.

Background

The court considered four sealing motions filed by Defendant AviaGames Inc. concerning its motions asking to exclude evidence at trial. Some materials contained AviaGames’s source code, business practices, strategy, products, and algorithms. Other materials contained information that Plaintiff Skillz Platform Inc. had designated as highly confidential, including descriptions of Skillz’s proprietary technology and product development.

Because motions in limine concern evidence that may be excluded from trial, the court treated them as more than tangentially related to the case’s merits. It therefore applied the “compelling reasons” standard, which requires a strong justification for restricting public access to judicial records. The court explained that trade secrets, confidential source code, and confidential business information that could harm a party’s competitive position can satisfy that standard. It also required any sealing request to be narrowly tailored to cover only material that should be sealed.

Rulings on AviaGames’s Materials

For AviaGames’s motion concerning its motions in limine, ECF No. 351, the court granted sealing for specified portions of two motions that contained confidential business information and source code. It denied sealing for entire expert reports, infringement-contention exhibits, and other exhibits because sealing the documents in their entirety was not narrowly tailored. Those denials were without prejudice to AviaGames filing a renewed motion seeking to seal specified redacted portions.

For AviaGames’s motion concerning Skillz-designated material, ECF No. 382, the court granted sealing for highlighted portions of two motions that contained confidential source code or business information. It denied sealing for three entire expert reports and a deposition transcript because the requests were not narrowly tailored. Those denials were without prejudice to AviaGames filing a renewed motion with narrower redactions.

Rulings on Skillz-Designated Materials

For AviaGames’s motion concerning another party’s material, ECF No. 352, the court granted sealing for specified highlighted portions and several entire exhibits containing Skillz’s confidential source code or business information. It denied sealing for some documents because Skillz’s supporting statement did not request that they be sealed, and denied sealing for other entire documents because the requests were not narrowly tailored. Those denials were without prejudice to Skillz filing a renewed supporting statement with narrower redactions.

For AviaGames’s motion concerning its motions in limine numbers 2 and 4, ECF No. 381, the court granted sealing for specified highlighted portions and certain entire exhibits containing confidential source code or business information. It denied sealing for several entire expert reports and deposition transcripts because the requests were not narrowly tailored. Those denials were without prejudice to Skillz filing a renewed supporting statement seeking to seal specified redacted portions.

Final Order

Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered that each of the four administrative motions—ECF Nos. 351, 352, 381, and 382—was GRANTED IN PART and DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART. The order allowed AviaGames or Skillz, depending on the material involved, to submit narrower sealing requests or supporting statements within seven days. The order addressed access to filings and did not resolve the underlying claims between Skillz and AviaGames.