Plexxikon Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation

Filing 387

ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO SEAL. Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 3/16/2020. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/16/2020)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 PLEXXIKON INC., Plaintiff, 8 9 10 11 v. Case No. 17-cv-04405-HSG ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO SEAL NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION, United States District Court Northern District of California Defendant. 12 13 The Court anticipates that, given the nature of this case, the parties will continue to file 14 voluminous or multiple administrative motions to seal. To streamline this process, the Court 15 directs the parties to review and comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5 as well as the Court’s 16 additional procedures as detailed below. 17 Any proposed order under Civil Local Rule 79-5(d)(1)(B) must include in the table for 18 each item sought to be sealed: (1) the docket numbers of the public and provisionally sealed 19 versions of documents sought to be filed under seal; (2) the name of the document; (3) the specific 20 portion(s) of the document sought to be filed under seal; and (4) the filer’s reasons for seeking 21 sealing of the material, along with citations to the relevant declarations and any supporting legal 22 authority. The reasons provided must be specific and tailored to the portion(s) of the document 23 sought to be sealed; “[s]imply mentioning a general category of privilege, without any further 24 elaboration or any specific linkage with the documents, does not satisfy the burden.” See 25 Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1184 (9th Cir. 2006). The parties may 26 use the four-column table in Dkt. No. 386 as a template. 27 28 Any responsive declaration by a Designating Party under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(1) must include a new proposed order in the tabular format described above, and must include the 1 Designating Party’s reasons for sealing the material with citations to the relevant declarations and 2 supporting legal authority. In addition, any declaration by a Designating Party under Civil Local 3 Rule 79-5(e)(1) that seeks less extensive sealing than the underlying administrative motions to seal 4 must be accompanied by revised redacted and unredacted versions of the documents sought to be 5 sealed that comply with the requirements of Civil Local Rule 79-5(d)(1)(C) and (D), including the 6 requirement that the portions sought to be sealed must be clearly marked on the unredacted 7 version. 8 9 Any declaration, whether under Civil Local Rule 79-5(d)(1)(A) or (e)(1), that claims confidentiality obligations to a non-party as a basis for sealing a document or a portion of a document must be served on the non-party as set forth in Civil Local Rule 79-5(e). The non-party 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 must also be notified that it must comply with the procedures set forth in that rule for Designating 12 Parties, except that the non-party will have four days from service of the declaration—rather than 13 from the filing of the administrative motion to seal—to file a declaration under Civil Local Rule 14 79-5(e)(1). 15 If no responsive declaration is filed under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(1), the party that filed 16 the administrative motion to seal must notify the Court and indicate that the motion should be 17 denied on that basis. 18 For any further briefing in this case where the parties anticipate multiple administrative 19 motions to seal, the parties—as well as any non-parties with potentially sealable information— 20 must, upon the completion of briefing, jointly file a new, combined administrative motion to seal 21 for all requests where sealing is unopposed. The parties may indicate in the initial motion to file 22 under seal that accompanies a brief or other document that a more fulsome and revised motion to 23 seal will be forthcoming after the completion of briefing pursuant to this order. If any requests to 24 seal are opposed, each party or non-party making an opposed request should file a single 25 combined administrative motion to seal covering all of their opposed requests. The later 26 combined motion to seal that is filed should clearly identify the docket numbers of the prior 27 motions to seal that are superseded by the combined motion. 28 All proposed orders should be submitted in Word format by email to 2 1 on the same day the proposed order is e-filed. The parties should not 2 provide the Court with any redacted chambers copies. 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 3/16/2020 ______________________________________ HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 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?