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)
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?