Attia v. Oura Ring, Inc. et al

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
PETER ATTIA,
Plaintiff,
v.
OURARING INC., et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 23-cv-03433-HSG (LJC)
ORDER RESOLVING FOUR SEALING
MOTIONS
ECF NOS.: 127, 129, 131, 139
Courts apply a “good cause” standard when evaluating requests to seal portions of
nondispositive motions. Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir.
2003); see Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006) (although
“[t]hose who seek to maintain the secrecy of documents attached to dispositive motions must meet
the high threshold of showing that compelling reasons support secrecy” a showing of “good
cause” suffices to “keep sealed records attached to non-dispositive motions.”). Having reviewed
the parties’ pending sealing motions requesting that portions of discovery letter briefs and
materials attached to discovery letter briefs be kept under seal, and applying the good cause
standard, the undersigned rules as follows:
1. Plaintiffs’ administrative motion to consider whether Defendants’ material should be
sealed, filed at ECF No. 127 is GRANTED in part. Exhibit 1C and 2A–2D to the
parties’ joint letter brief at ECF No. 128 shall remain sealed. As Plaintiffs did not
provide a basis for sealing Exhibits 1A and 1B, these shall not remain sealed. Within
five business days of this Order, Plaintiffs shall file Exhibits 1A and 1B on the public
docket.
Case 4:23-cv-03433-HSG Document 365 Filed 09/29/26 Page 1 of 2

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
2. Plaintiff’s administrative motion to consider whether Defendants’ material should be
sealed, filed at ECF No. 129, is GRANTED in part. Exhibits 2A–2C to the parties’
joint letter brief at ECF No. 130 shall remain under seal. As Plaintiffs did not provide
a basis for sealing Exhibit 2D, this shall not remain sealed. Within five business days
of this order, Plaintiff shall file Exhibit 2D on the public docket.
3. Plaintiff’s administrative motion to consider whether Defendants’ material should be
sealed, filed at ECF No. 131, is GRANTED.
4. Defendants’ administrative motion to consider whether Plaintiffs’ material should be
sealed, filed at ECF No. 139, is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 29, 2026
LISA J. CISNEROS
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:23-cv-03433-HSG Document 365 Filed 09/29/26 Page 2 of 2