A dispute between Hewlett-Packard and its shareholders lasting three years and including almost 400 fillings ended with a printer-cartridge bang when Judge Charles Breyer responded to HP’s motions for thousands of pages of heavily redacted documents to be sealed with a heavily redacted ruling of his own. Well played, sir.
Unsurprisingly, the redacted response by the judge has been making the rounds to the delight of many, including Above the Law, Techdirt and this very blog.
Amid the levity, the judge does offer instructions in the final page’s footnote should HP wish to still pursue the sealing of its documents.
No motion for reconsideration will be entertained unless HP identifies within three days “a limited amount of exceptionally sensitive information that truly deserves protection” under the “compelling reasons” standard of Kamakana v. City and Cty. of Honolulu […] outlined by page and line number and including “specific factual findings” for each. See O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc. […].
In light of the “public interest in understanding the judicial process” as it relates to the settlement of these claims, the Court will not countenance arguments that public filing would put HP at a competitive or legal disadvantage. See Kamakana, […].
What did you think of the judge’s creative denial? Please post below.