govinfo:USCOURTS-cand-3_22-cv-01101-9

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
United States District Court 
Northern District of California 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
 
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 
DAWN DANGAARD, et al., 
Plaintiffs, 
v. 
 
INSTAGRAM, LLC, et al., 
Defendants. 
 
 
 
No.  22-01101 WHA    
 
 
ORDER RE SEALING 
(DKT. NOS. 276, 281, 288) 
 
 
This order addresses motions to seal (Dkt. Nos. 276, 281, 288) which stem from the 
supplemental discovery filings in this action. 
The public enjoys the right to know to whom the public courts provide relief (or not).  
Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–80 (9th Cir. 2006). Filings “more 
than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only for “compelling reasons.”  Ctr. 
for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101–02 (9th Cir.).  That “standard applies 
to most judicial records,” with a “good cause” standard applying otherwise.  Id. at 1098.  Parties 
seeking to seal filings in this district must also follow basic rules, Civil L.R. 79-5. 
 
Case 3:22-cv-01101-WHA     Document 326     Filed 12/12/24     Page 1 of 3
 
2 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
United States District Court 
Northern District of California 
This order now addresses the requested sealings, and rules as follows:  
Sealed Dkt. No. 
 
Document/Exhibit Result Reasoning 
Dkt. No. 276-2 
 
 
Exhibit A 
 
Decl. of Remy Gayet 
GRANTED 
IN PART 
AND 
DENIED IN 
PART.  
Although this declaration was 
not attached to Meta’s motion 
for summary judgment, this 
declaration sheds light on 
central allegations in this 
action.  However, given the 
risk that a third party use this 
information for a nefarious 
purpose, the following 
language/numbers shall be 
redacted:  
• ¶ 4, line10: the rest of the 
sentence after “from.” 
• ¶ 4, line10: the number 
after “under.” 
• ¶ 5, line 16: the number 
after “above.” 
• ¶ 7, line 1: the number 
after “of.” 
• ¶ 9, line 21: the number 
after “of.” 
• ¶ 10, line 25: the number 
after “of.” 
• ¶ 11, line 14: the number 
after “of.” 
 
The remainder of the 
declaration must be unsealed. 
 
Dkt No. 281-2 at 3-
4 
Meta’s Motion in 
Limine # 1 
Proposed 
redactions 
are 
DENIED. 
These same allegations are 
present elsewhere in the 
record and do not warrant 
sealing here. 
 
Dkt. No. 281-2 at 16 Plaintiffs’ Response 
in Opposition to 
Meta’s Motion in 
Limine #1 
Proposed 
redactions 
are 
DENIED. 
Meta has not sufficiently 
articulated how these will 
cause competitive harm.   
 
Dkt. No. 281-2 at 
10-11 
Plaintiffs’ Response 
in Opposition to 
Meta’s Motion in 
Limine # 2 
 
Proposed 
redactions 
are 
DENIED. 
Given that the general upshot 
of the redactions (and the 
potential use) of this report is 
explained elsewhere in the 
response, sealing is 
unwarranted. 
Case 3:22-cv-01101-WHA     Document 326     Filed 12/12/24     Page 2 of 3
 
3 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
United States District Court 
Northern District of California 
Dkt. No. 281-4 Exhibit 3 Proposed 
redactions 
are 
DENIED. 
Meta’s has not demonstrated 
that its terms of service, as 
described in these proposed 
redactions, could lead to 
future harm. 
 
Dkt. No. 281-5 
 
Exhibit 2 Entirety,  
GRANTED. 
Given that this exhibit does 
not speak to the merits of this 
action, sealing is permitted. 
 
This order will now address Appendix 2 to the parties’ proposed pretrial order (Dkt. No. 
288-1.  Plaintiffs seek to seal the personally identifiable information (PII) of third-party 
individuals, which would include the non-public email addresses and phone numbers of 
individuals who may have been witnesses had this action gone to trial (Dkt. No. 295).  Given 
that pages 11 through 193 comprises of essentially just PII, those pages are to be SEALED.  As 
such, the requested redactions are GRANTED.   
The movant shall file public versions of the aforementioned documents in full 
compliance with this order by JANUARY 31, 2025, AT NOON. 
 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
 
Dated:  December 12, 2024. 
 
  
WILLIAM ALSUP 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
Case 3:22-cv-01101-WHA     Document 326     Filed 12/12/24     Page 3 of 3

Passage view · GavelSight