Carolyn Jane Blakely v. Elutia, Inc. f/k/a Aziyo Biologics, Inc.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cathy Ann Bencivengo (author)
Analysis
Defendant Elutia, Inc. moved to seal a confidential business agreement (Exhibit A) that it intended to attach to a forthcoming motion to compel arbitration. The Court granted the motion, finding that Elutia met the 'compelling reasons' standard to seal the document.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Motion to Seal Exhibit A granted“The Court therefore GRANTS Elutia’s motion to seal Exhibit A to Elutia’s forthcoming motion to compel arbitration.” | agree with court The court correctly identified the 'compelling reasons' standard required by Ninth Circuit precedent for sealing judicial records. The court reviewed the exhibit and accepted the defendant's assertion that the document contains trade secrets and proprietary business information where redaction would be insufficient. While the order is brief and does not detail the specific factual findings beyond the defendant's representations, the application of the standard to a trade secret document is legally sound. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly cites the controlling Ninth Circuit precedent regarding the presumption of public access and the 'compelling reasons' exception. It applies this standard to the specific facts presented (trade secrets/proprietary business agreement) and grants the relief. The reasoning is concise but legally sufficient for a sealing order.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CAROLYN JANE BLAKELY, Case No.: 3:25-cv-02330-CAB-DEB 12 Plaintiff, 13 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO v. SEAL 14 ELUTIA, INC. F/K/A AZIYO 15 BIOLOGICS, INC., et al., [Doc. No. 28] 16 Defendants. 17 18 On February 23, 2026, Defendant Elutia Inc. f/k/a Aziyo Biologics, Inc. (“Elutia”) 19 filed a motion to seal Exhibit A to Elutia’s forthcoming motion to compel arbitration. 20 [Doc. No. 28.] On February 25, 2026, the Court received a copy of the exhibit that Elutia 21 proposes to seal. 22 Courts generally apply a “compelling reasons” standard when considering motions 23 to seal documents. Pintos v. Pac. Creditors Ass’n, 605 F.3d 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2010) 24 (quoting Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006)). 25 To overcome the strong presumption in favor of access, the party seeking to seal a judicial 26 record attached to a dispositive motion must “articulate compelling reasons supported by 27 specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies 28 favoring disclosure, such as the public interest in understanding the judicial process.” 1 || Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178-79 (internal citation and quotation marks omitted) (cleaned 2 3 Elutia’s motion to seal states that Exhibit A is a highly confidential, proprietary 4 business agreement between the Defendants in this case. [Doc. No. 28-1.] Elutia states 5 || that these documents contain trade secret information and redaction would not adequately 6 protect confidential business information because nearly all the material within the 7 ||agreement is confidential. [/d.] 8 Having reviewed Elutia’s motion and Exhibit A, the Court finds that Elutia has met 9 || the “compelling reasons” standard to seal. The Court therefore GRANTS Elutia’s motion 10 |/to seal Exhibit A to Elutia’s forthcoming motion to compel arbitration. 11 Itis SO ORDERED. 12 Dated: February 26, 2026 □ Z 13 Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 14 United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28