Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
January 25, 2022, Decided; January 25, 2022, Filed
Pending before the Court is the Federal Trade Commission's ("FTC") unopposed motion to file under seal the instant complaint, which contains information designated by defendants and third parties as confidential. See FTC's Unopposed Mot. to File Compl. Under Seal ("Mot. to Seal") at 1.1 The motion to seal is granted, subject to further consideration by the United States District Judge to whom this matter is randomly assigned.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
"The starting point in considering a motion to seal court records is a strong presumption in favor of public access to judicial proceedings." Hardaway v. D.C. Hous. Auth., 843 F.3d 973, 980, 427 U.S. App. D.C. 68 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (quoting EEOC v. Nat'l Children's Center, Inc., 98 F.3d 1406, 1409 (D.C. Cir. 1996)). The six factors, originally identified in United States v. Hubbard, 650 F.2d 293 (D.C. Cir. 1980), courts should consider in determining whether that presumption may be overcome include:
(1) the need for public access to the documents at issue; (2) the extent of previous public access to the documents; (3) the fact that someone has objected to disclosure, and the identity of that person; (4) the strength of any property and privacy interests asserted; (5) the possibility of prejudice to those opposing disclosure; and (6) the purposes for which the documents were introduced during the judicial proceedings."
Metlife, Inc. v. Fin. Stability Oversight Council, 865 F.3d 661, 665, 431 U.S. App. D.C. 314 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (quoting Nat'l Children's Ctr., 98 F.3d at 1409 (citing [*3] Hubbard, 650 F.2d at 317-22)); see also In re the Matter of the Application of Jason Leopold to Unseal Certain Electronic Surveillance Applications and Orders, 964 F.3d 1121, 1129-30 (D.C. Cir. 2020) (explaining that unless "Congress has spoken directly to the issue at hand," the "common-law standard enshrined in the Hubbard balancing test" governs "sealing decisions" (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Metlife, 865 F.3d at 669)). In "motions to seal or unseal judicial records, the Hubbard test has consistently served as our lodestar because it ensures that we fully account for the various public and private interests at stake." Metlife, 865 F.3d at 666.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89583 *
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION and AEROJET ROCKETDYNE HOLDINGS, INC., Defendants.
Prior History: FTC v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89585 (D.D.C., Jan. 25, 2022)
seal, confidential, further order, public access, third party, disclosure, confidential information, judicial proceedings, relevant information, Unopposed, documents, possibility of prejudice, privacy interest, acquisition, designated, regulation, unredacted, redacted, ensures, records, unseal