Hyundai Electronics, et al v. Rambus, Inc.

Filing 3964

ORDER granting in part and denying in part Hynix's request to redact portions of order granting motion to stay execution of judgment. Signed by Judge Whyte on 5/22/09. (rmwlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/26/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION E-filed: 5/26/09

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR AMERICA INC., HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR U.K. LTD., and HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR DEUTSCHLAND GmbH, Plaintiffs, v. RAMBUS INC., Defendant.

No. C-00-20905 RMW ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART REQUEST TO REDACT PORTIONS OF ORDER GRANTING HYNIX'S MOTION TO STAY EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT

On May 14, 2009, the court filed under seal its order granting with conditions Hynix's motion to stay execution of judgment and directing that on-going royalties be paid into an escrow account. The order allowed the parties seven days to present a meritorious request that certain portions of the order be redacted from the publicly filed copy of the order, absent which the unredacted order would be publicly filed. Hynix requested redactions on page 3 of the order: portions of lines 2-3, which discussed certain surety terms for the issuance of a bond, and portions of lines 15-16 which identified the specific properties offered as security to Rambus. Hynix's counsel stated that the information is confidential financial and business information of Hynix and was filed under seal in connection with

ORDER C-00-20905-RMW TER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

the motion. Rambus objected to the proposed redactions, arguing that the nature of the security underlying the bond and the specific identification of the properties offered as security is not a sensitive business matter, similar in type to the contingency plans which Hynix has routinely announced during earnings calls. Rambus cites Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.23d 1172, 1178-81 (9th Cir. 2005), for the proposition that a party's subjective preference to keep facts confidential is not enough to justify sealing them, and instead, that there must be an objective and cognizable reason that overcomes the public's interest in access to judicial records and the contents of court decisions. In response, Hynix argues that Rambus has waived its objection to sealing these facts because it did not object when Hynix sought to have the documents containing such facts submitted under seal in connection with the underlying motion. Since the issue involves public access, however, Rambus' alleged waiver is not dispositive. Hynix also contends that the redactions are proper because the information is confidential and sensitive business information that has not been publicly disclosed. The Ninth Circuit in Kamakana stressed the presumption in favor of the public's access to judicial records, finding that absent compelling reasons justifying maintaining documents under seal, documents submitted in connection with dispositive motions should be open to the public. The "compelling reasons" standard is a higher standard than the mere "good cause" requirement under Rule 26(c) in connection with non-dispositive motions and protective orders governing discovery. Hynix was obligated to present "articulable facts" identifying the interests favoring continued secrecy and to show that these specific interests overcame the presumption of access by outweighing the public interest in understanding the judicial process. Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1181 (citing Foltz v. State Farm Auto Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1136 (9th Cir. 2003), and Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F.3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995). Hynix has not done so except with respect to its negotiation with the surety of the terms for the posting of the bond. The court finds that Hynix's concern that publicly revealing those negotiations could interfere with Hynix's ability to successfully negotiate favorable terms. Therefore, the request to redact the portion of page 3:2-3 is granted, pending the
ORDER C-00-20905-RMW TER

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

posting of the supersedeas bond. However, once the bond has been posted, there would not appear to be a need to maintain confidentiality. A fully unredacted copy of the May 14, 2009 order will be filed at that time. The court fails to see why the identity of the properties offered by Hynix as security for the portion of the judgment not bonded cannot be disclosed at this time. Accordingly, the request to redact pages 3:15-16 is denied. Therefore, a redacted copy of the May 14, 2009 order will be filed publicly, and following the posting of the supersedeas bond, an unredacted copy of the order will be publicly filed.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

DATED:

5/22/09

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER C-00-20905-RMW TER

RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

This document has been electronically sent to: counsel in 00-20905.
Counsel Rambus: Kathryn Kalb Anderson Peter A. Detre Erin C. Dougherty Sean Eskovitz Burton Alexander Gross Keith Rhoderic Dhu Hamilton, II Pierre J. Hubert Andrea Jill Weiss Jeffries Miriam Kim Carolyn Hoecker Luedtke Steven McCall Perry Jennifer Lynn Polse Matthew Thomas Powers Rollin Andrew Ransom Rosemarie Theresa Ring Gregory P. Stone Craig N. Tolliver Donald Ward David C. Yang Douglas A. Cawley Scott L Cole William Hans Baumgartner, Jr Scott W. Hejny Kelly Max Klaus Catherine Rajwani Thomas N Tarnay Hynix: Theodore G. Brown , III Daniel J. Furniss Joseph A. Greco Julie Jinsook Han Tomomi Katherine Harkey Jordan Trent Jones Patrick Lynch Kenneth Lee Nissly Kenneth Ryan O'Rourke Belinda Martinez Vega Geoffrey Hurndall Yost Susan Gregory van Keulen Allen Ruby Micron: Robert Jason Becher John D Beynon Jared Bobrow ORDER C-00-20905-RMW TER Email Appearances: 05-00334 05-02298 06-00244 00-20905

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

x x x x x x x x x x x x

x

x

x x x x x x x x x x x x

x

x

x x x x x x

[e-mail] john.bey [e-mail] [e-mail]

x x x

x x

x x x

x x x

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Yonaton M Rosenzweig Harold Avrum Barza Linda Jane Brewer Aaron Bennett Craig Leeron Kalay David J. Lender Rachael Lynn Ballard McCracken Sven Raz David J. Ruderman Elizabeth Stotland Weiswasser Nanya: Jason Sheffield Angell Kristin Sarah Cornuelle Chester Wren-Ming Day Jan Ellen Ellard Vickie L. Feeman Robert E. Freitas Craig R. Kaufman Hao Li Cathy Yunshan Lui Theresa E. Norton Mark Shean Kaiwen Tseng Samsung: Steven S. Cherensky Dana Prescott Kenned Powers Matthew Douglas Powers Edward Robert Reines United States Dept. of Justice May Lee Heye Eugene S. Litvinoff Niall Edmund Lynch

y oniro [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

x

x x x x x x x x x x

x

x

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

x x x x x x x x x x x x

x x

x x x x

x

x

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail], [e-mail] [e-mail]

x x x x

x x x x

x

x

[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

x x x

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel that have not registered for e-filing under the court's CM/ECF program in each action. Dated: 5/26/09 TER Chambers of Judge Whyte

ORDER C-00-20905-RMW TER

5