Core Optical Technologies, LLC v. Juniper Networks, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CORE OPTICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Case No. 21-cv-02428-VC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART

v. MOTION TO SEAL

JUNIPER NETWORKS INC, Re: Dkt. No. 80 Defendant.

Core’s motion to seal is granted in part. See Dkt. No. 80. Counsel for Juniper has identified portions of the documents Core moved to seal as revealing confidential aspects of Juniper’s products, including customer and business information, such as the identities of Juniper’s suppliers.1 See Dkt. No. 92. Juniper asserts that disclosure of such information could violate Juniper’s contractual obligations to customers and harm its competitive standing in the market. Where a motion “is more than tangentially related to the merits of a case,” a party seeking to seal documents must provide “compelling reasons.” Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1103 (9th Cir. 2016). Courts in this district differ about whether motions for leave to file amended pleadings fit the bill. Compare Gatan, Inc. v. Nion Co., 2017 WL 57337, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2017) (applying the “good cause” standard to a motion for leave…