Network Protection Sciences, LLC v. Juniper Networks, Inc. et al

Filing 326

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL (DKT. NO. 291) by Hon. William Alsup denying 291 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/24/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 9 Plaintiff, For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 11 12 13 No. C 12-01106 WHA NETWORK PROTECTION SCIENCES, LLC, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL (DKT. NO. 291) v. FORTINET, INC., Defendant. / 14 15 On September 17, defendant Fortinet filed a motion to seal documents in support of the 16 parties’ paired motions in liminie and oppositions (Dkt. No. 291). Fortinet filed a declaration 17 with the motion to seal stating that the information to be sealed pertained to Fortinet’s 18 confidential source code, confidential technical documents, and business information. Most of 19 the redactions in the 15 documents the parties seek to file under seal appear reasonable. Some of 20 the redactions, however, are overbroad and improper. For example, on page 46 of Dkt. No. 284- 21 18 Fortinet has redacted information relating to the purchase price of the ’601 patent before it 22 was owned by plaintiff Network Protection Sciences, LLC. The motion to seal is accordingly 23 DENIED. Fortinet may resubmit revised redactions by SEPTEMBER 26 AT NOON. Untimely 24 submissions or overbroad redactions will result in the subject documents being filed in full on 25 the public docket. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 Dated: September 24, 2013. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?