1 2 3 A 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MEDIMPACT HEALTHCARE Case No. 3:19-cv-01865-GPC-DEB 11 || SYSTEMS, INC., A CALIFORNIA

CORPORATION; MEDIMPACT ORDER GRANTING

12 | INTERNATIONAL LLC, A PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO

CALIFORNIA LIMITED MOTION TO SEAL

13 || LIABILITY COMPANY; AND DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF

MEDIMPACT INTERNATIONAL PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO

14 || HONG KONG LTD., A HONG DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN 5 KONG COMPANY, LIMINE NO. 7 16 Plaintiffs,

V. Judge: The Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel

17 IQVIA INC., a Delaware corporation; 18 || IOVIA LTD., a UK company: IOVIA [ECF No. 836] AG, a Swiss company; OMAR 19 | GHOSHEH, individually; and AMIT SADANA, individually; and DOES 1- 20 || 20, 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1 Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motions to Seal Documents in Support of 2 || Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 7 (the “Motion”). (ECF 3 || No. 836.) The Motion seeks to file under seal the following (the “Sealed Materials”): 4 e Exhibits 3 and 4 to the Declaration of Jennifer D. Bennett filed in Support of 5 MedImpact’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 7; and 6 e Portions of MedImpact’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion in Limine no. 7. 7 Compelling reasons exist to seal the Sealed Materials. The Sealed Materials 8 || are excerpts from and quotations to deposition transcripts marked as 9 || “CONFIDENTIAL — OUTSIDE COUNSEL ONLY” under the governing protective 10 | order in this case. That order requires the parties to seek to seal such documents if 1] | they are attached to a motion. (ECF 382 4 16.) Further, the Sealed Materials reference 12 || Defendants’ sensitive business information, particularly Defendants’ offers of 13 || products and services, which implicates Defendants’ competitive standing in certain 14 || industries as well as the status of Defendants’ product development. Accordingly, 15 || the disclosure of this information would subject Plaintiffs and Defendants to a risk 16 || of substantial harm or prejudice. See McArdle v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 09-cv-1117, 17 || 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 218070, at *13—-14 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 13, 2018). 18 Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that there are compelling reasons to 19 || GRANT the Motion. It is ORDERED that Sealed Materials shall be SEALED until 20 || further order of this Court. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 73 Dated: January 10, 2023 C2. sale (0 94 Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel 45 United States District Judge 26 27 28 (Case No. 3:19-ev-01865-GPC-DEB