Implicit Networks, Inc. v. Juniper Networks, Inc.

Filing 163

ORDER ON JUNIPER'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE AND IMPLICIT'S APPLICATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 158 159 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 11/6/2012)

1
2
3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6
7
8
9

ORDER ON JUNIPER’S
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
CONSOLIDATE AND IMPLICIT’S
APPLICATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

Plaintiff,
v.
JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

No. C 10-04234 SI

IMPLICIT NETWORKS, INC.,

Defendant.

/

11
12

Currently before the Court is Juniper’s opposed administrative motion to consolidate the hearing

13

date on Implicit’s Daubert motion with the parties’ summary judgment motions. Docket No. 159. Also

14

before the Court is Implicit’s ex parte application to be allowed to file under seal Exhibits B, F and J

15

to the Declaration of Spencer Hosie in Support of Implicit’s Daubert Motion. Docket No. 158.

16

With respect to Juniper’s administrative motion, the Court GRANTS that motion. Implicit’s

17

Daubert motion should be consolidated with the parties’ motions for summary judgment. The

18

opposition to Implicit’s Daubert motion is due on November 16, 2012, the reply is due December 3,

19

2012.1 The hearing on that motion is reset for December 14, 2012.

20

With respect to Implicit’s motion to seal exhibits to its Daubert motion, Implicit explains that

21

the exhibits at issue have been designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS’ EYES

22

ONLY” by Juniper, and Juniper has not agreed to allow the exhibits to be filed in the public record. On

23

the current record, the Court cannot determine whether “compelling” reasons exist that would support

24

sealing the records at issue. See e.g., In re Midland Nat’l Life Ins. Co Annuity Sales Practices Litig. v.

25

Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 686 F.3d 1115, 1119-20 (9th Cir. 2012) (party seeking to seal

26
27
28

1

Implicit opposed Juniper’s motion to consolidate because Juniper proposed requiring Implicit
to file its reply on November 27, three business days after Thanksgiving. Under the Court’s order,
Implicit has until December 3, 2012 to file its reply.

1

information submitted with Daubert motion considered in conjunction with summary judgment motion

2

must show compelling reasons that override the public policies favoring disclosure).

3

Therefore, Juniper shall submit a declaration within four days of the date of this Order

4

showing that compelling reasons exist to seal all or part of each of the exhibits at issue. If Juniper

5

cannot demonstrate compelling reasons why the Court should seal Exhibits B, F and J, the Court will

6

order that they be filed in the public record.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Dated: November 6, 2012
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2