Vnus Medical Technologies Inc. v. Biolitec, Inc. et al

Filing 333

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on September 16, 2010. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2010)

Vnus Medical Technologies Inc. v. Biolitec, Inc. et al

Doc. 333

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Matthew B. Lehr (Bar No. 213139) Diem-Suong T. Nguyen (Bar No. 237557) David J. Lisson (Bar No. 250994) Chung G. Suh (Bar No. 244889) Jeremy Brodsky (Bar No. 257674) DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL LLP 1600 El Camino Real Menlo Park, California 94025 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a VNUS Medical Technologies UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL CASE NOS. C08-03129 MMC & C08-04234 MMC Dockets.Justia.com

) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) BIOLITEC, INC. and NEW STAR LASERS, ) INC. d/b/a COOLTOUCH, INC., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ) TYCO HEALTHCARE GROUP LP d/b/a ) VNUS MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) TOTAL VEIN SOLUTIONS, LLC d/b/a ) TOTAL VEIN SYSTEMS, ) ) Defendant. ) ) )

TYCO HEALTHCARE GROUP LP d/b/a VNUS MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES,

LEAD CASE NO. C08-03129 MMC CASE NO. C08-03129 MMC [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL (D.I. 296) [CIVIL L.R. 7-11, 79-5] CASE NO. C08-04234 MMC (consolidated with C08-3129 MMC)

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

Before the Court is the Defendants' Motion for Administrative Relief to File Documents Under Seal dated September 7, 2010, by which Defendants seek leave to file under seal unredacted versions of certain documents submitted in support of Defendants' Opposition to VNUS's Motion in Limine No. 1 to Exclude Testimony and the use of Prior Testimony Regarding Certain Alleged Uses by Drs. Bush, Mercier and Dunne ("Defendants' Opposition"). Having reviewed the parties' submissions filed in support of the motion, the Court rules as follows: 1. The motion is GRANTED in part, specifically, as to the following documents that

plaintiff has shown contain material properly filed under seal (see Kertz Decl., filed September 13, 2010), each of which the requesting party is directed to file under seal: no later than September 22, 2010, under seal: Exhibits D, E, F, I, J, L, X, and DD to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg in Support of Defendants' Opposition Redacted pages 2 (lns. 21-22), 3 (lns. 1-4), and 4 (lns. 5-7) of Defendants' Opposition, filed on September 7, 2010 2. The motion is DENIED in part, specifically, as to the following documents, in light

of plaintiff's having withdrawn its prior designation of confidentiality, each of which the requesting party is directed to file in the public record no later than five calendar days from the date of this order: September 22, 2010: Exhibits N and EE to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg in Support of Defendants' Opposition Designated portions of Defendants' Opposition not identified above IT IS SO ORDERED. September 16, Dated: ______________ 2010 HON. MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge

1 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL CASE NOS. C08-03129 MMC & C08-04234 MMC