Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. Cepheid

Filing 88

ORDER approving Defendant's Notice of Withdrawal of Administrative Motion to File Under Seal signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte. (shyS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2016)

1
2
3
4
5

Erik R. Puknys (SBN: 190926)
[e-mail]
M. Paul Barker (SBN: 243986)
[e-mail]
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
3300 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

6
7
8
9
10

Wesley E. Overson (SBN: 154737)
[e-mail]
Grant L. Kim (SBN: 114989)
[e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

11
Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant Cepheid
12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17

ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, INC.,

18

Plaintiff and
Counterdefendant,

19
v.
20

CASE NO. 3:14-CV-03228-EDL
CEPHEID’S NOTICE OF
WITHDRAWAL OF
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
FILE UNDER SEAL

CEPHEID,
21
Defendant and
Counterclaimant.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CEPHEID’S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
CASE NO. 3:14-CV-03228-EDL

sf-3678938

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5, Defendant Cepheid hereby notifies the

2

Court that it is withdrawing the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (“Administrative

3

Motion”) that it submitted on July 19, 2016 (Docket Number (“D.N.”) 81).

4

As Cepheid noted in its Administrative Motion, it sought leave to file under seal

5

references in its Motion for Summary Judgment of Patent Ineligibility (D.N. 81-4), to a

6

document that Plaintiff Roche had submitted under seal. Cepheid explained that it thought

7

there was no need to seal, but filed the motion because Roche declined to agree to disclosure.

8

Civil Local Rule 79-5 required Roche to file a declaration establishing that the

9

designated material should be sealed within four days of Administrative Motion, or by July 25,

10

2016. Roche did not file any such declaration. On July 26, 2016, Roche notified Cepheid by

11

email that it agreed that no portion of Cepheid’s summary judgment motion need be

12

maintained under seal. A copy of that email is attached to this Notice as Exhibit A.

13

In view of Roche’s notice and failure to file the required declaration, Cepheid requests

14

that the Court deny Cepheid’s administrative motion.

15

Dated: July 29, 2016

By: /s/ Grant L. Kim
Grant L. Kim

16

Erik R. Puknys (SBN: 190926)
[e-mail]
M. Paul Barker (SBN: 243986)
[e-mail]
FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
3300 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94304
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]

17
18
19
20

TES DISTRIC
TA
T
S

23

T
UR
CO

22

UN
IT
ED

21

IT IS SO ORDERED

28

N

DI

RN

FO

LI

Dated: 8/2/2016

ER

27

Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte

TH

26

NO R

25

IA

24

CA
ST RIC T OF

Wesley E. Overson (SBN: 154737)
[e-mail]
Grant L. Kim (SBN: 114989)
[e-mail]
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105-2482
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant and
Counterclaimant Cepheid
1

sf-3678938

CEPHEID’S NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
CASE NO. 3:14-CV-03228-EDL