Aristocrat Technologies et al v. International Game Technology et al

Filing 794

ORDER re 705 , 743 Motions to Seal. Signed by Judge Whyte on 5/4/10. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/4/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 v. INTERNATIONAL GAME TECHNOLOGY and IGT, Defendants. [Re Docket Nos. 705, 743] ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES, AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED and ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiffs, No. C-06-03717 RMW IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION E-FILED on 5/4/10

ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO SEAL

Defendants International Game Technology and IGT (collectively "IGT") move to file under seal: (1) portions of its notice of motion and motion for leave to file first supplemental answer and counterclaims, (2) portions of its first supplemental answer and counterclaims, and (3) Exhibits B and C to the Declaration of Kristin Cleveland in support thereof. Plaintiffs Aristocrat Technologies, Australia PTY Limited, and Aristocrat Technologies, Inc. (collectively "Aristocrat") move to file under seal portions of its opposition to IGT's motion for additional depositions after the discovery deadline and Exhibit G to the Declaration of Robert J. Blanch in support thereof. A request to seal must establish that the document, or portions thereof, is privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the law. Civ. L. R. 79-5(a). The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing of only sealable material. Id. Having
ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO SEAL --No. C-06-03717 RMW CCL

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

reviewed the material that IGT and Aristocrat seek to file under seal, the court has concerns about the extent of material which the parties seek to file under seal. With the exception of the portions identified in paragraph 3 of the Declaration of Kristin L. Cleveland in support of IGT's motion to seal, it appears that there is no basis for filing the remainder of the material under seal. See Dkt. No. 706 ¶ 3. The court therefore orders the parties to explain why the remaining material is sealable. If the parties do not submit an explanation establishing that the rest of the material is sealable within ten days, the motions to seal will be denied.

DATED:

5/4/10

RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO SEAL --No. C-06-03717 RMW CCL 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Notice of this document has been electronically sent to: Counsel for Plaintiffs: Anthony R. de Alcaeus Terrence Patrick McMahon Jeremy Todd Elman Robert J. Blanch , Jr. Phillip C. Ducker Counsel for Defendants: Jeffrey Stewart Love Daniel Justin Weinberg Gabriel M. Ramsey Garth Alan Winn Kristin L. Cleveland Laura Kieran Kieckhefer Michael J. Bettinger Patrick Marshall Bible Robert T. Cruzen Stephanie Sue Nelson Eric Lance Wesenberg [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]

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.

Dated:

5/4/10

CCL Chambers of Judge Whyte

ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO SEAL --No. C-06-03717 RMW CCL 3