Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation

Filing 462

ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND EXHIBITS THERETO; DIRECTIONS TO PARTIES To the extent Synopsys, by its responsive declaration, asserts specified portions of Mentor's motion for attorney fees, specified portions of Exhibit B to the Loesch Declaration, and the entirety of Exhibits G, H, I, N, and O to the Loesch Declaration are sealable, Mentor's administrative motion is granted, and the requested portions of said exhibits may r emain under seal. No later than May 22, 2015, Mentor shall file in the public record a revised redacted version of its motion for attorney fees and Exhibit B in conformity therewith. Mentors administrative motion is denied as to Exhibits A, C, J and U. The Court defers ruling on the sealing of Exhibit F pending Synopsys' filing, no later than May 22, 2015, a supplemental response in which Synopsys provides a proposed redacted version limiting the amount of material sought to be sealed. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on May 13, 2015. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2015)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

SYNOPSYS, INC.,

8
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

9
10
11
12

No. C 12-6467 MMC

Plaintiff,

ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION
TO SEAL DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
ATTORNEY FEES AND EXHIBITS
THERETO; DIRECTIONS TO PARTIES

v.
MENTOR GRAPHICS CORPORATION,
Defendant.
/

13
14

Before the Court is defendant Mentor Graphics Corporation’s (“Mentor”)

15

“Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Motion for Attorney Fees,” filed May 4, 2015,

16

pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5, by which Mentor seeks to file under seal certain exhibits

17

submitted in support of its motion for attorney fees, which documents have been

18

designated confidential by plaintiff Synopsys Inc. (“Synopsys”), and certain portions of its

19

motion for attorney fees that incorporate information from those exhibits. See Civil L.R. 79-

20

5(d)-(e) (providing, where party seeks to file under seal material designated confidential by

21

another party, such party shall file motion for sealing order, after which designating party

22

must file, within 4 days, “declaration . . . establishing that all of the designated information

23

is sealable”). On May 8, 2015, Synopsys timely filed its responsive declaration in support

24

of sealing. See id. Having read and considered the administrative motion and the parties’

25

respective declarations filed in support thereof, the Court hereby rules as follows.

26

To the extent Synopsys, by its responsive declaration, asserts specified portions of

27

Mentor’s motion for attorney fees, specified portions of Exhibit B to the Declaration of

28

Salumeh Loesch in support thereof (“Loesch Declaration”), and the entirety of Exhibits G,

1

H, I, N, and O to the Loesch Declaration are sealable,1 Mentor’s administrative motion is

2

GRANTED, and the requested portions of said exhibits may remain under seal. No later

3

than May 22, 2015, Mentor shall file in the public record a revised redacted version of its

4

motion for attorney fees and Exhibit B in conformity therewith.
As to Exhibits A, C, and U to the Loesch Declaration, Synopsys, in its declaration,

5
6

has stated it has no objection to the filing of said documents in the public record, and,

7

accordingly, Mentor’s administrative motion is DENIED as to Exhibits A, C, and U.

8

As to Exhibit J to the Loesch Declaration, Synopsys has not addressed said exhibit

9

in its responsive declaration, and, accordingly, Mentor’s administrative motion is DENIED

10

as to Exhibit J.
Lastly, as to Exhibit F to the Loesch Declaration, which Mentor seeks to have sealed

11
12

in its entirety, the motion sweeps too broadly, as said document appears to contain

13

substantial amounts of non-sealable material. See Civil L.R. 79-5(a) (providing “[a] sealing

14

order may issue only upon a request that establishes that the document, or portions

15

thereof, is privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection

16

under the law”; requiring request “be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable

17

material”). In lieu of denial, the Court DEFERS ruling on the sealing of Exhibit F pending

18

Synopsys’ filing, no later than May 22, 2015, a supplemental response in which Synopsys

19

provides a proposed redacted version limiting the amount of material sought to be sealed.

20

Pending the Court’s ruling on the supplemental response, said document will remain under

21

seal.

22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23
24

Dated: May 13, 2015
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28

1

Mentor does not seek to file under seal and, presumably, Synopsys has not
designated confidential, the exhibits to the Loesch Declaration not referenced herein,
namely, Exhibits D, E, K, L, M, P through T, V, and W.
2