Fortinet, Inc v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc. et al

Filing 179

ORDER by Judge Whyte granting 174 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2010)

Fortinet, Inc v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc. et al

Doc. 179

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

MICHAEL A. LADRA, State Bar No. 64037 Email: [e-mail] JAMES C. YOON, State Bar No. 177155 Email: [e-mail] STEFANI E. SHANBERG, State Bar No. 206717 Email: [e-mail] ARIANA M. CHUNG-HAN (State Bar No. 197572) Email: [e-mail] ROBIN L. BREWER, State Bar No. 253686 Email: [e-mail] WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI Professional Corporation 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant FORTINET, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION FORTINET, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC., and PATRICK R. BROGAN, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO.: 09-CV-00036-RMW (PVT) ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS AND PORTIONS OF DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL PERTAINING TO FORTINET, INC.'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF OBJECTIONS AND MOTION TO STRIKE NEW EVIDENCE AND NEW ARGUMENTS PRESENTED IN PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC.'S REPLY MEMORANDA IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION CASE NO.: 09-CV-00036-RMW (PVT)

4025927_1.DOC

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated:

Having considered Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Fortinet, Inc.'s administrative motion to file under seal portions of Fortinet's Reply in Support of Objections and Motion to Strike New Evidence and New Arguments Presented in Palo Alto Networks, Inc.'s ("PAN") Reply Memoranda in Support of Motions for Summary Judgment ("Reply") pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5(c), and good cause appearing: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Fortinet's administrative motion is GRANTED. Accordingly, the following portions of Fortinet's Reply shall be filed under seal: a) 2:7-9 (following "admit that . . ." through end of sentence); b) 2:11 (following "including that . . ." through ". . . and that"); c) 2:11-12 (following "and that . . ." through ". . . is not"); d) 2:14 (following "interconnectivity of . . ." through ". . . Similarly"); e) 2:15 (following "`allocation' in . . ." through end of line); f) 2:17-18 (following "reply brief that . . ." through ". . . and that"). IT IS SO ORDERED

July 19, 2010

The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte United States District Court Judge

Presented by: WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI /s/ Stefani E. Shanberg Stefani E. Shanberg Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant FORTINET, INC.

ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION CASE NO.: 09-CV-00036-RMW (PVT)

-1-

4025927_1.DOC