TransPerfect Global, Inc. et al v. MotionPoint Corporation

Filing 371

AMENDED 347 ORDER GRANTING IN PART 316 TRANSPERFECTS MOTION TO SEAL; DENYING 314 MOTIONPOINTS MOTION TO SEAL. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 6/25/2013. (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2013)

Download PDF
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 AMENDED 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, 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 23-26 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. 9 TransPerfect has not, however, provided good cause These excerpts do In addition to the documents discussed above, TransPerfect 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 previously refused to seal.1 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. The documents also discuss discounts 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 Exhibit 28 13 to Onkejekwe’s declaration in the public record. 14 shall publicly file its response to MotionPoint’s motions in 15 limine after redacting the information outlined above. 16 In addition, it MotionPoint’s motion to seal (Docket No. 314) is DENIED. 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: June 25, 2013 June 19, 2013 25 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 26 1 27 28 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). 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?