Fortinet, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc. et al

Filing 245

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen granting in part and denying in part 221 Defendants' Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; and granting 229 Defendants' Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (emclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
FORTINET, INC.,

7

Case No. 13-cv-05831-EMC

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
SOPHOS, INC., et al.,

10

Defendants.
11

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION AND
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION TO FILE
UNDER SEAL

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Re: Dkt. Nos. 221, 229
12
13

Currently pending before the Court is Sophos’s administrative motion and supplemental

14
motion to file under seal. Having reviewed the motions and the related declarations (submitted by
15
both Sophos and Fortinet), the Court hereby GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion to
16
file under seal and GRANTS the supplemental motion to file under seal. More specifically, the
17
Court orders as follows.
18

(1) Exhibits 1, 4 (designated portions), 6, 8, 9 (designated portions1), 10, 31, 33, and 34

19
shall be filed under seal.
20
(2) Exhibit 5 shall not be filed under seal. (Neither Sophos nor Fortinet provided a
21
declaration supporting sealing as to this exhibit.)

22

(3) The designated portions of Sophos’s motion for summary judgment shall be filed under

23
seal.
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
28

1

Sophos and Fortinet have designated different portions of Exhibit 9 as confidential.

1

Upon receipt of this order, Sophos shall publicly file Exhibit 5.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

3
4

Dated: September 17, 2015

5
________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2