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

Filing 467

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 2, 2011. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/2/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 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: (650) 752-2000 Facsimile: (650) 752-2111 6 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff Tyco Healthcare Group LP d/b/a VNUS Medical Technologies 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 12 TYCO HEALTHCARE GROUP LP d/b/a VNUS MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. 15 BIOLITEC, INC., 16 Defendant. 17 18 19 TYCO HEALTHCARE GROUP LP d/b/a VNUS MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, 20 Plaintiff, 21 v. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TOTAL VEIN SOLUTIONS, LLC d/b/a TOTAL VEIN SOLUTIONS Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 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 CASE NO. C08-04234 MMC (consolidated with C08-03129 MMC) 1 Before the Court is the Defendants’ Motion for Administrative Relief to File Documents 2 Under Seal dated August 12, 2011, by which defendants seek leave to file under seal unredacted 3 versions of certain documents submitted in support of their Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for 4 Summary Judgment of No Inequitable Conduct. Having reviewed the parties’ submissions filed in 5 support of the motion, the Court rules as follows: 6 1. The motion is GRANTED in part, specifically, as to the following documents that 7 plaintiff has shown contain material properly filed under seal (see Kertz Decl., filed August 19, 8 2011), each of which defendant is directed to file under seal, no later than five calendar days from 9 the date of this order: September 8, 2011: • The entirety of Exhibit J and portions of Exhibits AA and BB (reflecting Dr. Goldman’s hourly rate or retainer) to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenberg in Support of Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Inequitable Conduct. • 10 Designated portions of Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment of No Inequitable Conduct in which the confidential content of the above exhibits is set forth (page 4 (lns. 5-6) and material on pages 1 (ln. 15), 6 (lns. 6, 8), 7 (ln. 7), 8 (ln. 15), 9 (ln. 21), 15 (ln. 27), 20 (ln. 7), 22 (lns. 19, 25), and 23 (ln. 17) reflecting Dr. Goldman’s hourly rate or retainer). 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2. The motion is DENIED as to materials provided under seal that are not specifically 18 identified in the foregoing paragraph, as the designating party has not filed a “responsive 19 declaration.” Defendants are directed to file such documents in the public record no later than five 20 calendar days from the date of this order. September 8, 2011. 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: September 2 24 , 2011 The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge 25 26 27 28 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL – CASE NOs. 08-3129 & 08-4234 MMC

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?