Finjan, Inc. v. Juniper Network, Inc.

Filing 208

ORDER ON 198 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL. Signed by Judge William Alsup. (whalc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/9/2018)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

FINJAN, INC.,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14

No. C 17-05659 WHA

v.

ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

JUNIPER NETWORK, INC.,
Defendant.
/

15
16

In connection with a discovery motion, defendant Juniper Networks, Inc., filed an

17

administrative motion to file under seal Exhibit 1 appended to the motion — which contains

18

excerpts from plaintiff Finjan, Inc.’s first supplemental objections and responses to Juniper’s

19

first set of interrogatories — in its entirety and limited portions of Juniper’s discovery letter

20

brief that reference or quote Exhibit 1 (Dkt. No. 198).

21

In this circuit, courts start with a “strong presumption in favor of access” when

22

deciding whether to seal records. Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178

23

(9th Cir. 2006) (citing Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir.

24

2003)). To seal judicial records in connection with a dispositive motion requires “compelling

25

reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and

26

the public policies favoring disclosure.” See id. at 1178–79 (quotations and citations omitted).

27

A particularized showing of “good cause,” however, suffices to warrant sealing of judicial

28

records in connection with a non-dispositive motion. Id. at 1179–80.

1

Finjan’s supporting declaration states that the information in connection with Exhibit 1

2

describes Finjan’s confidential licensing practices and license agreements with third parties

3

(Dkt. No. 204 ¶ 3). This order finds that Finjan’s claim of potential competitive harm upon

4

public disclosure is insufficient to show good cause to seal. Juniper’s administrative motion is

5

DENIED. Finjan will be given TWO WEEKS to seek appellate review of this order. Thereafter,

6

absent order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Juniper shall file

7

unredacted versions of the aforementioned documents by OCTOBER 25 AT NOON.

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

Dated: October 9, 2018.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2