Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc.
- Beth Freeman
- 5:21-cv-02436
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 7
In Skillz Platform v. AviaGames, Judge Freeman granted two sealing motions and granted in part and denied in part a third.
Skillz Platform Inc. and AviaGames Inc.; the order also affects public access to the specified court filings.
What happened
Skillz Platform Inc. and AviaGames Inc. asked the court to keep portions of filings related to additional motions in limine—requests about what evidence may be used at trial—from public view.
The court found that these filings were closely related to the case’s merits, so sealing required compelling reasons. It approved sealing confidential business information, financial information, and source-code details when the requests were limited to the sensitive material.
In Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc., Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted the motions tied to ECF Nos. 581 and 587. She granted in part and denied in part the motion tied to ECF No. 562; the denials were without prejudice to a renewed request with narrower redactions within seven days.
The detailed version
- Skillz Platform Inc. v. AviaGames Inc. · No. 5:21-cv-02436
- Beth Freeman
- Jan. 19, 2024
Background
The court considered renewed motions to seal and related statements concerning the parties’ additional motions in limine. A motion in limine asks the court to exclude proposed evidence from trial. Because these motions concern evidence closely related to the merits, the court applied the “compelling reasons” standard for sealing.
Under that standard and the Northern District of California’s local sealing rule, a party must identify the interests supporting secrecy, provide evidentiary support when necessary, and request sealing narrowly enough to cover only material that can properly be sealed. The court explained that trade secrets and confidential business information that could harm a party’s competitive position can justify sealing.
Rulings on ECF No. 562
Skillz filed an administrative motion concerning AviaGames-designated confidential material in connection with Skillz’s renewed motion in limine No. 2. AviaGames identified confidential business communications, financial information, and details about the operation of its source code.
The court granted sealing for the highlighted portions of Skillz’s renewed motion in limine No. 2 and the supporting declaration, and for the entirety of Exhibits 1 and 2, because they contained confidential business information whose release could cause competitive harm. The court denied sealing for the entirety of Exhibits 3 and 4 because the requests were not narrowly tailored. Those denials were without prejudice to AviaGames filing a renewed statement seeking narrower redactions within seven days of the order.
The court therefore ordered that Skillz’s administrative motion concerning ECF No. 562 was GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
Ruling on ECF No. 581
Skillz filed an administrative motion concerning an exhibit supporting its opposition to AviaGames’ motion in limine about permitting Vickie Chen to testify in full and for related relief. AviaGames requested sealing only for highlighted portions containing confidential business communications and source-code details.
The court found compelling reasons and ruled that the proposed sealing was narrowly tailored. It granted sealing for the highlighted portions of Exhibit A to Skillz’s response.
The court ordered that Skillz’s administrative motion concerning ECF No. 581 was GRANTED.
Ruling on ECF No. 587
AviaGames moved to seal its opposition to Skillz’s renewed motion in limine No. 2 and supporting exhibits. AviaGames identified confidential business information, including financial information from its licensing agreements. The court found that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored, including sealing the entire one-page Exhibit 3 because the entire document contained confidential financial information.
The court granted sealing for the identified portions of AviaGames’ opposition and Exhibits 2 and 4, for the entire Exhibit 3, and for highlighted portions of Exhibit 5. The court ordered that AviaGames’ administrative motion concerning ECF No. 587 was GRANTED.
Effect of the Order
The order addressed only whether specified portions of filings should remain sealed. It did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute or the additional motions in limine. Judge Beth Labson Freeman entered the order on January 19, 2024.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.