Symantec Corporation v. Acronis, Inc

Filing 272

ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL (Dkt. Nos. 245 & 254). Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 9/25/2013. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/25/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 Northern District of California United States District Court 11 12 SYMANTEC CORPORATION, Plaintiff, 13 14 v. Case No.: 11-5310 EMC (JSC) ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL (Dkt. Nos. 245 & 254) 15 16 17 ACRONIS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. 18 19 On September 16, 2013, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying part 20 the parties’ administrative motions to seal filings related to Defendants Acronis Corporation, 21 et al., (collectively “Acronis”) Motion to Amend/Correct Invalidity Contentions (Dkt. Nos. 22 245 & 254). (Dkt. No. 259.) The Court hereby addresses certain outstanding issues with 23 respect to the motions to seal. 24 1. Although Acronis initially sought to file under seal an entire deposition transcript (Dkt. 25 No. 254-5, Exhibit B) at the request of Plaintiff Symantec Corporation (“Symantec”), 26 Symantec has since withdrawn this request and instead seeks to file selected portions 27 of the transcript under seal. Symantec has shown good cause for its request for sealing 28 1 the limited portions of the transcript and the Court GRANTS the request to file Docket 2 No. 264-1 under seal. 3 2. Symantec has likewise shown good cause for filing a narrowly tailored redacted 4 version of what was previously filed as Exhibit E to the Declaration of Kate Cassidy in 5 support of Symantec’s Opposition to Acronis’s Motion (Dkt. No. 254-8). 6 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the request to file Docket No. 264-2 under seal. 7 3. The Court previously denied Symantec’s request to file Exhibit A to the Declaration of 8 Kate Cassidy in support of Symantec’s Opposition to Acronis’s Motion (Dkt. No. 254- 9 4) under seal because the one-line email was predominately in Russian and no Northern District of California translation was provided. Symantec has since filed a certification stating that no 11 United States District Court 10 translation could be provided because the document is unreadable in Russian. (Dkt. 12 No. 262-1.) As a week has passed with no response from Acronis, the Court hereby 13 Orders that Symantec file Exhibit A on the public docket as there is no good cause for 14 sealing an unreadable document. 15 4. Symantec has failed to comply with the portions of the Court’s Order (Dkt. No. 259) 16 which granted the motion to seal with respect to Exhibits D, K, and L to the 17 Declaration of Kate Cassidy in support of Symantec’s Opposition to Acronis’s Motion 18 (Dkt. Nos. 254-7, 254-10, 254-11) and ordered these documents to be electronically 19 filed under seal within three days. To date, the documents have not been electronically 20 filed, and are thus, not part of the record. Symantec shall electronically file these 21 documents under seal by the close of business September 26, 2013 or the Court will 22 have to amend its Order denying Acronis’s motion to amend to eliminate any reliance 23 on this evidence. 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 25, 2013 _________________________________ JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28 2

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?