On 08/17/2016 JOHN MELLESMOEN filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against TINDER, INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is CRAIG D. KARLAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
CRAIG D. KARLAN
LUSKIN SCOTT O.
LAND SHANNON A.
MANATT PHELPS PHILLIPS
5/30/2019: Ex Parte Application
5/31/2019: Minute Order
5/31/2019: Minute Order
5/31/2019: Notice of Ruling
at 08:30 AM in Department N, Craig D. Karlan, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application ( FOR TRL CONT) - HeldRead MoreRead Less
at 2:39 PM in Department N, Craig D. Karlan, Presiding; Court OrderRead MoreRead Less
at 1:30 PM in Department N, Craig D. Karlan, Presiding; Court OrderRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application FOR TRL CONT)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Court Order) of 05/31/2019); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Notice of Ruling; Filed by John Mellesmoen (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Ex Parte Application (JT EXPARTE APP FOR TRL CONT); Filed by Tinder, Inc. (Defendant); Sean Rad (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department N; Ex-Parte Proceedings - HeldRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 am in Department WEN, Craig D. Karlan, Presiding; Exparte proceeding - CompletedRead MoreRead Less
Demurrer (TO COMPLAINT; MEMO OF P&A ); Filed by Attorney for DefendantRead MoreRead Less
Demurrer; Filed by Tinder, Inc. (Defendant); Sean Rad (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Motion to Strike; Filed by Tinder, Inc. (Defendant); Sean Rad (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Motion to Strike (PORTIONS OF PLFS COMPLAINT; MEMO OF P&A ); Filed by Attorney for DefendantRead MoreRead Less
Proof of Service; Filed by Attorney for PlaintiffRead MoreRead Less
Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by John Mellesmoen (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by John Mellesmoen (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Summons; Filed by PlaintiffRead MoreRead Less
Complaint FiledRead MoreRead Less
Summons Filed; Filed by Attorney for PlaintiffRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: SC126284 Hearing Date: November 18, 2020 Dept: N
Defendant Tinder, Inc.’s
Defendant Sean Rad’s Motion to File Records Under Seal is GRANTED.
Moving parties to give notice.
The trial court “may order that a record be filed under seal only if it expressly finds facts that establish: (1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4) The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest.” (McGuan v. Endovascular Techs., Inc. (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 974, 988, paragraph breaks omitted.)
Here, Defendants Tinder, Inc., and Sean Rad (“Defendants”) move to seal certain confidential documents supporting their respective motions for summary judgment. Defendants represent the exhibits contain confidential and private information with regard to trade secret or competitively sensitive business, commercial and financial information. Specifically, Defendants move to seal Exhibits 1 through 5 to the Declaration of Jonathan Badeen, Exhibits 1 through 13 to the Declaration of Brian Norgard, Exhibits 1 through 15 to the Declaration of Sean Rad, and Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Ryan Ogle.
Defendants contend the information is subject to the right to privacy and certain protections from public disclosure, and none of the information has any significance to the public. Further, Defendants argue the information is relevant to past and future product development, a substantial probability exists that their interests will be prejudiced if the information is not sealed and there is no less restrictive means to achieve the overriding interest.
The Court finds an order sealing the identified documents is proper. An overriding interest exists here that overcomes the right of public access to the records, i.e., Defendants’ right to maintaining the confidentiality of their proprietary information, and the public has no interest in accessing such information. The request is also narrowly tailored, in that Defendants ask only to seal such information that would disclose confidential information, and thus, the Court concludes it is proper to seal these records from public disclosure.
For these reasons, Defendant Tinder, Inc.’s
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases