Pacific Steel Group v. Commercial Metals Company

Background

The court had issued an order on the parties’ motions for summary judgment, identified as Dkt. No. 318. This order addressed how long that summary-judgment order would remain under seal and whether the parties could seek redactions before public filing.

Court’s Action

The court ordered that Dkt. No. 318 remain under seal until June 24, 2024, at noon. After that time, the order would be filed on the public docket.

The court directed the parties to file a joint proposed set of redactions by June 17, 2020, at noon, if they believed references to confidential materials needed to be removed. The parties also had to provide a table for each requested redaction, citations showing where the material had previously been included in the omnibus sealing motion, and a specific explanation of the compelling reasons supporting each request. The parties could submit the proposal through an administrative motion to file under seal.

Sealing Standard and Expected Result

The court warned that the parties should not seek redactions unless the information met the “compelling reasons” standard for sealing an order on a dispositive motion, citing Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu. The court stated that the summary-judgment order highlighted material that appeared to be covered by the parties’ omnibus sealing motion, but it believed that little, if any, of that material met the high standard. The court therefore expressed a strong inclination to issue the summary-judgment order with no redactions.

Effect

The ruling temporarily restricted public access to the summary-judgment order and established a process for the parties to request redactions. It did not decide the parties’ summary-judgment motions in this order.