U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC v. Acer, Inc. et al

Filing 1365

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL.(Granting in part and denying in part (1360 in case 4:10-cv-03724-CW; and 603 in case 4:10-cv-05254-CW. ) (ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/3/2015)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 U.S. ETHERNET INNOVATIONS, LLC, 5 6 7 Plaintiff, v. ACER, INC., et al., 8 9 ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL (Docket No. 1360) Defendants. and 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California No. C 10-3724 CW ATHEROS COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., 11 Intervenors. ________________________________/ 12 13 14 U.S. ETHERNET INNOVATIONS, LLC, 15 16 Plaintiff, No. C 10-5254 CW (Docket No. 603) v. 17 AT&T MOBILITY, LLC, et al., 18 Defendants. ________________________________/ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Before the Court is Plaintiff U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC’s (USEI) administrative motion to seal (Case No. 10-3724, Docket No. 1360; Case No. 10-5254, Docket No. 603). Under Civil Local Rule 79-5, a document may be filed under seal only if a party establishes that the portions sought to be sealed “are privileged, protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the law.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). Any sealing request must be narrowly tailored to cover only sealable 1 material. Id. The request must be supported by the designating 2 party’s declaration establishing that the information is sealable. 3 Id. subsection (d). “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to 4 5 inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial 6 records and documents.’” 7 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). 8 request, the Court begins with “a strong presumption of access 9 [as] the starting point.” In considering a sealing Id. A party seeking to seal records attached to a dispositive 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 11 motion bears the burden of establishing “compelling reasons 12 supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general 13 history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure.” 14 Id. at 1178-79. 15 “the heart of the interest in ensuring the public’s understanding 16 of the judicial process and of significant public events.” 17 at 1179. This is because dispositive motions represent Id. 18 19 Case No. USEI seeks leave to file under seal certain exhibits 20 10-3724 to its Motion to Alter or Amend the Court’s 21 Docket No. November 7, 2014 Summary Judgment Order. 22 1360 1. Exhibit B to the Declaration of Robert J. Leonard in support of USEI’s Motion to Alter or Amend the 23 24 Case No. Court’s November 7, 2014 Summary Judgment Order 25 10-5254 (Leonard Declaration). 26 Docket No. excerpts of the Corrected Expert Report regarding 27 603 infringement of the patents-in-suit by Intervenor 28 2 Exhibit B comprises 1 Intel, prepared by Dr. Michael Mitzenmacher, 2 USEI’s infringement expert. 3 GRANTED because USEI has limited its request to 4 excerpts containing confidential source code. The motion is 2. Exhibit C to the Leonard Declaration. 5 Exhibit C 6 comprises an excerpt of the May 29, 2014 7 Deposition of Dr. Michael Mitzenmacher, USEI’s 8 infringement expert. 9 any sealable information in this document. There does not appear to be United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 Accordingly, USEI’s request for leave to file 11 this document under seal is DENIED. 12 CONCLUSION 13 For the reason set forth above, USEI’s Administrative Motion 14 to File Under Seal (Case No. 10-3724, Docket No. 1360; Case No. 15 10-5254, Docket No. 603) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 16 For the document for which the motion is GRANTED, within four days 17 of the date of this Order, USEI shall electronically file it under 18 seal. For the document for which the motion is DENIED, the denial 19 is without prejudice. USEI must submit, within seven days of the 20 date of this Order, a revised declaration justifying why the 21 document is sealable. Otherwise, USEI must file the document in 22 the public record. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 Dated: 25 February 3, 2015 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 26 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?