Raytheon Applied Signal Technology, Inc. v. Emerging Markets Communications, Inc. et al

Filing 331

ORDER re 324 Request to File Joint Discovery Letter Under Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 03/12/2012. (dmrlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/12/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 APPLIED SIGNAL TECHNOLOGY, INC., 12 Plaintiff, 13 No. C-09-02180 SBA (DMR) ORDER REGARDING REQUEST TO FILE JOINT DISCOVERY LETTER UNDER SEAL [DOCKET NO. 324] v. 14 15 16 17 E M E R G I N G M A R K E T S COMMUNICATIONS, INC. ET AL, Defendants. ___________________________________/ 18 The court is in receipt of Defendants ViaSat, Inc. and Teledyne Paradise Datacom, LLC’s 19 renewed Motion for Administrative Relief for permission to file portions of a joint discovery letter 20 dated February 24, 2012 under seal, as well as an exhibit to the joint discovery letter in its entirety. 21 [Docket No. 324.] 22 By no later than 1:00 p.m. on March 13, 2012, Defendants ViaSat, Inc. and Teledyne 23 Paradise Datacom, LLC and/or Plaintiff Applied Signal Technology, Inc. shall e-file a letter 24 explaining why Exhibit A to the joint discovery letter, a privilege log, should be sealed from the 25 public record in its entirety. Specifically, the letter shall articulate exactly what information 26 27 28 1 contained in the privilege log is “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to 2 protection under the law.”1 N.D. Civ. L.R. 79-5(a). Such letter shall not exceed one page. 7 NO DONNA M. RYU M. Ryu United States Donna Judge e Magistrate dg RT 10 11 For the Northern District of California ER H 9 Ju LI 8 United States District Court I R NIA Dated: March 12, 2012 A 6 ERED ORD T IS SO FO 5 S IT IS SO ORDERED. UNIT ED 4 RT U O S DISTRICT TE C TA 3 N F D IS T IC T O R C 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 26 27 28 The court notes that simply designating information as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” does not create an entitlement to file confidential information under seal, as provided by the terms of the parties’ Stipulated Protective Order. See Docket No. 212 at 1 (stating that “Civil Local Rule 79-5 sets forth the procedures that must be followed and reflects the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the court to file material under seal.”) 2

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?