Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 887

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Information Supporting Reply in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion No. 1: To Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Stephen Clarke filed by Oracle International Corporation, Oracle USA Inc., Siebel Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Stipulation, # 3 Declaration of Jennifer Gloss in Support)(Alinder, Zachary) (Filed on 9/16/2010)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 887

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. HOUSE (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] BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP DAVID BOIES (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 333 Main Street Armonk, NY 10504 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (SBN 144177) FRED NORTON (SBN 224725) 1999 Harrison St., Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [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., et al. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION ORACLE USA, INC., et al., v. Plaintiffs, Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL) PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO PERMIT PLAINTIFFS TO FILE UNDER SEAL INFORMATION SUPPORTING REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION NO. 1: TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF DEFENDANTS' EXPERT STEPHEN CLARKE
Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

SAP AG, et al., Defendants.

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL INFORMATION SUPPORTING REPLY ISO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION NO. 1: TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF DEFENDANTS' EXPERT STEPHEN CLARKE
Dockets.Justia.com

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

I.

INTRODUCTION Pursuant to Local Rules 7-11(a) and 79-5(c), Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle

International Corporation and Siebel Systems, Inc. ("Plaintiffs" or "Oracle") hereby move that the Court order the Clerk of the Court to file under seal portions of the Declaration of Daniel S. Levy, Ph.D. in Support of Reply in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion No. 1: To Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Stephen Clarke ("Levy Declaration"). Portions of the Levy Declaration at Figures 1, 2 and A.1 contain information properly designated pursuant to the Stipulated Protective Order entered in this action as "Highly Confidential Information -- Attorneys' Eyes Only" by Oracle. Good cause exists to support filing these portions of the Levy Declaration under seal, as established in the attached Declaration of Jennifer Gloss in Support of Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion to Permit Plaintiffs to File Under Seal Information Supporting Reply in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion No. 1: To Exclude Testimony of Defendants' Expert Stephen Clarke ("Gloss Declaration" or "Gloss Decl."), because Oracle has narrowly tailored its request to seal only non-public, commercially sensitive, private and third-party confidential information, the disclosure of which would create a risk of significant competitive injury and particularized harm and prejudice to Oracle. An unredacted version of the Levy Declaration will be lodged with the Court on September 17, 2010. Accordingly, the Court should grant this Motion. II. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS TO SUPPORT FILING THE REQUESTED INFORMATION UNDER SEAL 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 . . . commercial information." Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). In particular, when the request for sealing concerns discovery documents attached to a non-dispositive motion, a showing of good cause to seal the documents is sufficient to justify protection under Rule 26(c). Navarro v. Eskanos & Adler, Case No. C-06 02231 WHA(EDL), 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24864 at *7 (Mar. 22, 2007) (citing Kamakana v. Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006)). To make such a showing, the party seeking protection from disclosure under the rule must demonstrate that 1
Case No. 07-CV-01658 PJH (EDL)

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL INFORMATION SUPPORTING REPLY ISO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION NO. 1: TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF DEFENDANTS' EXPERT STEPHEN CLARKE

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

public disclosure of such information would create a risk of significant competitive injury and particularized harm or prejudice. See Phillips v. General Motors Corp. 307 F. 3d 1206, 1211 (9th Cir. 2006) (setting forth the standard of good cause on a motion to seal). Oracle has established good cause to permit filing portions of the Levy Declaration at Figures 1, 2 and A.1 under seal through the Gloss Declaration, as required under Local Rule 79-5(d). The Gloss Declaration establishes both that Oracle has considered and treated this information as confidential and proprietary, and that public disclosure of such information would create a risk of significant competitive injury and particularized harm and prejudice to Oracle. Gloss Decl., ¶ 3; see Phillips, 307 F.3d at 1211. In addition, Oracle has taken steps to ensure that the information contained in the Levy Declaration remains confidential in this litigation. Gloss Decl., ¶ 4. Further, Oracle has narrowly tailored its request by only requesting sealing of the specific portions of these documents that contain the most commercially sensitive, private and confidential information. Id., ¶ 5. III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Oracle respectfully requests that the Court file under seal portions of the Levy Declaration at Figures 1, 2 and A.1.

DATED: September 16, 2010

BINGHAM McCUTCHEN LLP By: /s/ Zachary J. Alinder Zachary J. Alinder Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., et al.

2

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

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL INFORMATION SUPPORTING REPLY ISO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION NO. 1: TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY OF DEFENDANTS' EXPERT STEPHEN CLARKE