SYMMETRIX STUDIOS LLC v. The Defendants Identified on Schedule A

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: The plaintiff's motion to seal [4] is denied. "The court may for good cause shown enter an order directing that one or more documents be filed under seal." L.R. 26.2(b). "[A] district court must be sensitive to the rights of the public in determining whether any particular document, or class of documents, is appropriately filed under seal." United States v. Corbitt, 879 F.2d 224, 228 (7th Cir. 1989). Here, the plaintiff contends that "[i]f the portions requested were not sealed, Defendants may realize the situation and take the following actions: (1) closing the e commerce stores; (2) transferring the money/assets out; (3) opening new stores to continue the infringing activities. Even worse, these defendants may disclose and spread information to other stores that sell infringing products, leaving Plaintiff no way to recover the economic loss." The plaintiff cites no evidence to support this contention. The plaintiff has not shown that a seal is warranted. The Clerk shall unseal Dkt. No. 6. Mailed notice.