RSI Corporation v. International Business Machines Corporation et al

Filing 401

AMENDED ORDER clarifying 392 Order: the motion to seal is granted as to documents listed in the order and denied as to other documents listed in 283 the original motion. Signed by Judge Whyte on 4/17/2013. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2013)

Download PDF
1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Shon Morgan (Bar No. 187736) 2 shonmorgan@quinnemanuel.com Scott Commerson (Bar No. 227460) 3 scottcommerson@quinnemanuel.com 865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor 4 Los Angeles, California 90017-2543 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 5 Facsimile: (213) 443-3100 6 Attorneys for Defendant International Business Machines Corporation 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SAN JOSE DIVISION 12 RSI CORP., dba RESPONSIVE SYSTEMS COMPANY, a New Jersey corporation, 13 Plaintiff, 14 vs. 15 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES 16 CORPORATION; and DOES DEFENDANTS 1-20, 17 Defendants. 18 CASE NO. 5:08-cv-3414 RMW (PVT) AMENDED [PROPOSED] ORDER ON ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL: CONFIDENTIAL IBM INFORMATION IN RSI'S OPPOSITION TO IBM'S THIRD MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Complaint Date: February 15, 2008 Trial Date: March 18, 2013 19 20 21 This amends the previous sealing order, Dkt. No. 392. 22 Plaintiff has submitted an administrative request to seal portions of its Opposition to 23 IBM's Third Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 283). The request is made on the basis that 24 the material sought to be sealed reflect information designated by Defendant International 25 Business Machines Corporation as Protected Material pursuant to the Stipulated Protective Order 26 entered on September 23, 2010 (Dkt. #91). 27 28 00889.20502/5174601.1 Case No. 5:08-cv-3414 RMW [PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE UNDER SEAL 1 Pursuant to Civ. L. R. 79-5(d), Defendant IBM has submitted a declaration establishing 2 that portions of RSI's Opposition to IBM's Third Motion for Summary Judgment and associated 3 papers (Dkt. # 278 through Dkt. #281), contain sealable information. RSI's 4 Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS IBM’s Motion for Administrative Relief To Dkt. No. 283, as to the documents listed below 5 File Under Seal and ORDERS that the following portions of the Motion to Strike be filed under 6 seal: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Document to Seal RSI’s Opposition to IBM’s Third Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 278) Declaration of Martin Hubel (Dkt. # 279) Hubel Declaration Ex. A Hubel Declaration Ex. B Hubel Declaration Ex. C Hubel Declaration Ex. D Hubel Declaration Ex. E Hubel Declaration Ex. F Hubel Declaration Ex. G Hubel Declaration Ex. H Hubel Declaration Ex. I Hubel Declaration Ex. J Hubel Declaration Ex. K Hubel Declaration Ex. L Hubel Declaration Ex. M Hubel Declaration Ex. N Hubel Declaration Ex. O Declaration of Pamela Schultz (Dkt. #281) Schultz Declaration Ex. A Schultz Declaration Ex. C Schultz Declaration Ex. D Portions Accepted Under Seal Portions of 11;15 and 11:16 Portions of 3:5-6 and 3:25-26 Portions of ¶¶ 44, 53-57, 107, 110-11, 11314 The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document Portions of 6:7 The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The entirety of the document The court denies RSI's motion to seal, Dkt. No. 283, as to the other documents. DATED: April 17, 2013 21 22 23 The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28 00889.20502/5174601.1 Case No. 5:08-cv-3414 RMW [PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE UNDER SEAL

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?