TransPerfect Global, Inc. et al v. MotionPoint Corporation
Filing
347
ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken GRANTING IN PART 316 TRANSPERFECTS MOTION TO SEAL;DENYING MOTIONPOINTS 314 MOTION TO SEAL. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/19/2013)
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
5
TRANSPERFECT GLOBAL, INC.,
TRANSPERFECT TRANSLATIONS INT’L,
INC., and TRANSLATIONS.COM, INC.,
6
ORDER GRANTING IN
PART TRANSPERFECT’S
MOTION TO SEAL;
DENYING
MOTIONPOINT’S
MOTION TO SEAL
(Docket Nos. 314 &
316)
Plaintiffs,
7
v.
8
MOTIONPOINT CORP.,
9
Defendant.
________________________________/
10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
No. C 10-2590 CW
11
Plaintiffs TransPerfect Global, Inc., TransPerfect
12
Translations International, Inc., and Translations.com, Inc.
13
(collectively, TransPerfect) move to seal portions of their
14
response to Defendant MotionPoint Corporation’s motions in limine
15
and several of its supporting exhibits.
16
portions of its response to TransPerfect’s motions in limine, its
17
response to TransPerfect’s brief on disputed issues of law, and
18
several supporting exhibits.
19
submissions, the Court grants TransPerfect’s motion to seal in
20
part and denies it in part and denies MotionPoint’s motion to
21
seal.
22
I.
23
MotionPoint moves to seal
After reviewing the parties’
TransPerfect’s Motion to Seal
TransPerfect seeks to seal various excerpts from pages 20
24
through 24 of its response to MotionPoint’s motions in limine as
25
well as Exhibits 23-26 and 28 to L. Okey Onyejekwe’s declaration
26
in support thereof.
27
contain information about TransPerfect’s proprietary technology
28
and sensitive financial information.
It contends that these excerpts and exhibits
After reviewing these
1
documents the Court finds that TransPerfect has provided good
2
cause for sealing the excerpts on pages 20, 22, and 23 (lines 1-3
3
only) of its response as well as Exhibits 23-28 to Onkejekwe’s
4
declaration.
5
for sealing the excerpts on pages 23 (lines 25-28) and 24 (lines
6
1-3) and Exhibit 28 to Onkejekwe’s declaration.
7
not discuss -- or even mention -- any sensitive information about
8
TransPerfect’s finances and, thus, may not be sealed.
TransPerfect has not, however, provided good cause
These excerpts do
In addition to the documents discussed above, TransPerfect
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
seeks to seal various excerpts and exhibits that MotionPoint has
11
designated confidential.
12
exhibits, the Court finds that none of them is sealable.
13
Local Rule 79-5(a) only permits information to be sealed if it is
14
“privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled
15
to protection under the law.”
16
excerpts of TransPerfect’s brief merely because they contain
17
allegations about MotionPoint employees.
18
excerpts on pages 5-14 of TransPerfect’s response brief and
19
Exhibits 7-10, 13, and 29-31 to Onkejekwe’s declaration may not be
20
sealed.
21
II.
22
After reviewing these excerpts and
Civil
MotionPoint cannot seal exhibits or
Accordingly, the
MotionPoint’s Motion to Seal
MotionPoint moves to seal (1) several excerpts from its
23
response to TransPerfect’s motions in limine; (2) over twenty
24
exhibits to Meghan Bordonaro’s declaration supporting that
25
response; and (3) its response to TransPerfect’s brief on disputed
26
issues of law.
27
amount of non-sealable information, including descriptions of the
28
patents-in-suit and excerpts of reports that the Court has
These excerpts and exhibits contain a significant
2
1
1
previously refused to seal.
The documents also discuss discounts
2
MotionPoint offered prospective clients several years ago,
3
TransPerfect’s efforts to purchase MotionPoint several years ago,
4
and MotionPoint’s efforts to compete with TransPerfect for clients
5
several years ago.
6
how the disclosure of any of this information would harm its
7
business today.
8
denied.
MotionPoint has not explained in any detail
Accordingly, MotionPoint’s motion to seal is
CONCLUSION
10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
9
For the reasons set forth above, TransPerfect’s motion to
11
seal (Docket No. 316) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
12
Within two days of this order, TransPerfect shall file Exhibits
13
23-26 to Onkejekwe’s declaration in the public record.
14
addition, it shall publicly file its response to MotionPoint’s
15
motions in limine after redacting the information outlined above.
16
MotionPoint’s motion to seal (Docket No. 314) is DENIED.
In
17
Within two days of this order, MotionPoint shall publicly file
18
every previously sealed exhibit to Bordonaro’s declaration.
19
shall also publicly file unredacted versions of its response to
20
TransPerfect’s motions in limine and its response to
21
TransPerfect’s brief on disputed issues of law.
22
It
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
Dated:
25
June 19, 2013
CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge
26
Some of these excerpts and exhibits were designated confidential
by TransPerfect rather than MotionPoint. However, TransPerfect failed
to file a declaration supporting its confidential designation of this
information as it was required to do under Civil Local Rule 79-5(d).
1
27
28
3
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?