Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 413

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte granting 395 Motion to Seal Document (edllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2009)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 413

Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document413 Case3:07-cv-01658-PJH Document409-1 Filed08/13/09 Page1 of 44 Filed08/11/09 Page1 of

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

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP DONN P. PICKETT (SBN 72257) GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (SBN 157468) HOLLY A. HOWARD (SBN 136045) ZACHARY J. ALINDER (SBN 209009) BREE HANN (SBN 215695) Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] DORIAN DALEY (SBN 129049) JENNIFER GLOSS (SBN 154227) 500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7 Redwood City, CA 94070 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle International Corporation, and Oracle EMEA Limited UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ORACLE USA, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. SAP AG, et al., Defendants. CASE NO. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL) [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO PERMIT DEFENDANTS TO FILE UNDER SEAL DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING DEFENDANTS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL

Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO PERMIT DEFENDANTS TO FILE UNDER SEAL DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING DEFENDANTS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL Dockets.Justia.com

Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document413 Case3:07-cv-01658-PJH Document409-1 Filed08/13/09 Page2 of 44 Filed08/11/09 Page2 of

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

Pending before this Court is SAP AG, SAP America, Inc., and TomorrowNow, Inc.'s (collectively, "Defendants") Administrative Motion to Permit Defendants to File Under Seal Documents Supporting Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion for Sanctions and Reply in Support of Motion to Compel ("Motion to Seal"). Through their Motion to Seal, Defendants together with Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle International Corporation, and Oracle EMEA Limited (collectively, "Oracle," and with Defendants, the "Parties"), request an Order sealing (1) Portions of Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c) and 16(f) ("Motion for Sanctions Reply"); (2) Portions of the Reply Declaration of Stephen K. Clarke in Support of Defendants' Motion for Sanctions Reply; (3) Portions of Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion to Compel Production of Financial Information ("Motion to Compel Reply"); (4) Portions of the Declaration of Stephen K. Clarke in Support of Defendants' Motion to Compel Reply; and (5) Exhibit 8 to the Declaration of Jason McDonell in Support of Defendants' Motion to Compel Reply ("McDonell Declaration"). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) provides broad discretion for a trial court to permit sealing of court documents for, inter alia, the protection of "a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information." Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 26(c). In particular, when the request for sealing concerns discovery documents attached to a nondispositive motion, a showing of good cause to seal the documents is sufficient to justify protection under Rule 26(c). See Navarro v. Eskanos & Adler, Case No. C-06 02231 WHA(EDL), 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24864 at *7 (March 22,2007) (citing Kamakana v. Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006)). In compliance with this Court's Standing Order for Cases Involving Sealed or Confidential Documents, Rule 26(c) and Civil Local Rule 79-5, Oracle has filed the Declaration of Zachary Alinder (the "Alinder Declaration") in support of Defendants' Motion to Seal on August 11, 2009. Through the Alinder Declaration, Oracle provides evidence of good cause sufficient for this Court to permit filing the requested exhibits under seal. The Alinder Declaration establishes both that Oracle has considered and treated the information contained in the subject documents as confidential, commercially sensitive and proprietary, and that public 2 Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO PERMIT DEFENDANTS TO FILE UNDER SEAL DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING DEFENDANTS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL

Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document413 Case3:07-cv-01658-PJH Document409-1 Filed08/13/09 Page3 of 44 Filed08/11/09 Page3 of

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

disclosure of such information would create a risk of significant competitive injury and particularized harm and prejudice to Oracle. See Phillips v. General Motors Corp. 307 F. 3d 1206, 1211 (9th Cir. 2006). The Alinder Declaration also establishes that the request for sealing has been narrowly tailored. Having considered Defendants' Motion to Seal and the documents and exhibits filed in support, including the Alinder Declaration and the Stipulation of the Parties to Permit Defendants to File Plaintiffs' Documents Under Seal, and GOOD CAUSE having been shown: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: Defendants' Motion to Seal is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court shall file under seal the unredacted versions of the following documents that have been lodged with the Court: 1. Defendants' Sanctions Reply Brief: Portions of page 12, containing materials designated by Oracle as "Confidential Information" or "Highly Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only." 2. Declaration of Stephen K. Clarke in Support of Defendants' Motion for Sanctions Reply: Portions of pages 2 (including ¶8), 3 and 7, containing materials designated by Oracle as "Confidential Information" or "Highly Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only." 3. Defendants' Motion to Compel Reply: Portions of pages 3-5, 7, 9, 12, and 14-15 of Defendants' Motion to Compel Reply, containing materials designated by Oracle as "Confidential Information" or "Highly Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only." 4. Declaration of Stephen K. Clarke in Support of Defendants' Motion to Compel Reply: Portions of pages 3 and 5-7, containing materials designated by Oracle as "Confidential Information" or "Highly Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only." 5. Ex. 8 to the McDonell Declaration: Exhibit 8 contains portions of Oracle's Supplemental Responses and Objections to Defendants' Second and Third Targeted Search Requests, containing materials designated by Oracle as 3 Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO PERMIT DEFENDANTS TO FILE UNDER SEAL DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING DEFENDANTS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL

Case4:07-cv-01658-PJH Document413 Case3:07-cv-01658-PJH Document409-1 Filed08/13/09 Page4 of 44 Filed08/11/09 Page4 of

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

"Confidential Information" or "Highly Confidential Information - Attorneys' Eyes Only." IT IS SO ORDERED
UNIT ED

S

S DISTRICT TE C TA

ER

N

F D IS T IC T O R

4

Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO PERMIT DEFENDANTS TO FILE UNDER SEAL DOCUMENTS SUPPORTING DEFENDANTS' REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL

A

C

LI

FO

Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte Laporte D. izabeth United StatesEMagistrate Judge udge l J
NO

R NIA

August 12 DATED: _______________, 2009

IT IS S

O ORD

ERED

RT U O

RT

H