Symantec Corporation v. Acronis, Inc. et al
ORDER ORDER RE SYMANTEC'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL [DOCKET NO. 58] (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 2/12/2013)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
FINAL ORDER RE SYMANTEC’S
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE
UNDER SEAL [DOCKET NO. 58]
No. C 12-05331 SI
ACRONIS, INC., et al.,
Currently before the Court is Symantec’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal [Docket No.
58]. On January 31, 2013, the Court ordered Acronis to provide a supplemental declaration establishing
good cause for sealing Exhibits 1 and 7, which were submitted with Symantec’s Reply. Docket No. 69.
On February 6, 2013, Acronis submitted the supplemental Declaration of Goetz Eaton, explaining that
Acronis no longer seeks to file under seal Exhibit 7 and only seeks to file under seal portions of Exhibit
1, which is a discovery order issued by Magistrate Judge Corley in Case No. 11-5310 EMC (JSC). Mr.
Eaton argues good cause to seal page 4, lines 4-9 and 11-16 and page 6, lines 21-22 of Exhibit 1 exists
because Judge Corley filed those portions of her order under seal. Docket No. 74.
In light of Judge Corley’s ruling as to her discovery order in Case No. 11-5310, the Court grants
Symantec’s administrative motion to file under seal. Within five days of the date of this Order,
Symantec shall file e-file in the public docket Exhibit 7 and a revised version of Exhibit 1, redacting
page 4, lines 4-9 and 11-16 and page 6, lines 21-22 only. Symantec must also e-file under seal (if it
hasn’t already), a full copy of Exhibit 1.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 12, 2013
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?