Pardi
Pardi v. Tricida, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 MICHAEL PARDI, et al., Case No. 21-cv-00076-HSG
Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING MOTIONS TO
SEAL
v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 108, 110, 114, 116, 127, 130, TRICIDA, INC., et al., 133, 134 Defendants.
12 Pending before the Court are several motions to seal related to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint. See Dkt. Nos. 108, 110, 114, 116, 127, 130, 133, 134. For the reasons detailed below, the Court DENIES the motions. I. LEGAL STANDARD Courts generally apply a “compelling reasons” standard when considering motions to seal documents. Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)). “This standard derives from the common law right ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Id. (quoting Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178). “[A] strong presumption in favor of access is the starting point.” Kamakana, 447…