Avago Technologies Fiber IP (Singapore) PTE. Ltd. v. IPtronics Inc. et al

Filing 574

ORDER RE: MOTION TO SEAL by Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal granting-in-part and denying-in-part 563 . (psglc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/14/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12

SAN JOSE DIVISION

13

AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

14
Plaintiffs,
15
16

v.
IPTRONICS INC., et al.,

17

Defendants.

18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 5:10-cv-02863-EJD
ORDER RE: MOTION TO SEAL
(Re: Docket No. 563)

19

Defendants seek to file eighteen documents under seal.1 “Historically, courts have

20

recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial

21
22

records and documents.’”2 Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong
presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.”3 Parties seeking to seal judicial records

23
24
25

1

26

2

27

Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v.
Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n. 7 (1978)).
3

28

See Docket Nos. 563.

Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)).
1

Case No.: 5:10-cv-02863-EJD
ORDER RE: MOTION TO SEAL

1
2

relating to dispositive motions bear the burden of overcoming the presumption with “compelling
reasons” that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure.4

3

However, “while protecting the public's interest in access to the courts, we must remain

4

mindful of the parties' right to access those same courts upon terms which will not unduly harm

5

their competitive interest.”5 Records attached to nondispositive motions therefore are not subject

6

to the strong presumption of access.6 Because the documents attached to nondispositive motions

7
8
9

“are often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action,” parties moving
to seal must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c).7 As with dispositive motions, the

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

standard applicable to nondispositive motions requires a “particularized showing”8 that “specific

11

prejudice or harm will result” if the information is disclosed.9 “Broad allegations of harm,

12

unsubstantiated by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice.10 A protective

13
14

order sealing the documents during discovery may reflect the court’s previous determination that
good cause exists to keep the documents sealed,11 but a blanket protective order that allows the

15
16
17

parties to designate confidential documents does not provide sufficient judicial scrutiny to
determine whether each particular document should remain sealed.12

18
4

Id. at 1178-79.

5

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 727 F.3d 1214, 1228-29 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

6

See id. at 1180.

7

Id. at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted).

8

Id.

19
20
21
22
23
9

24

Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002);
see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).

25

10

Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992).

26

11

See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80.

27

12

28

See Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A) (“Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to
designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or
portions thereof, are sealable.”).
2
Case No.: 5:10-cv-02863-EJD
ORDER RE: MOTION TO SEAL

In addition to making particularized showings of good cause, parties moving to seal

1
2

documents must comply with the procedures established by Civ. L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to

3

Civ. L.R. 79-5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request that establishes the document

4

is “sealable,” or “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under

5
6

the law.” “The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material, and
must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).”13 “Within 4 days of the filing of the Administrative

7
8
9

Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration as required by subsection
79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable.”14
With these standards in mind, the courts rules on the instant motion as follows:

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

Motion
Docket No.
563-21

Document to be Sealed
Defendants’ Motion to
Strike

Result
16:10-12 SEALED.
Remainder
UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-22

Exhibit 1 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket
Nos. 56323, 563-24
Docket No.
563-25

Exhibit 2 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Exhibit 3 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-26

Exhibit 4 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-27

Exhibit 5 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-28

Exhibit 6 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.

Exhibit 7 to the

UNSEALED.

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

13

Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). In part, Civ. L.R. 79-5(d) requires the submitting party to attach a “proposed
order that is narrowly tailored to seal only the sealable material” which “lists in table format each
document or portion thereof that is sought to be sealed,” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(b), and an
“unreadacted version of the document” that indicates “by highlighting or other clear method, the
portions of the document that have been omitted from the redacted version.”
Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d).

14

28

Reason/Explanation
Only sealed portions narrowly
tailored to confidential technical
information and supported by a
declaration.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to

Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).
3

Case No.: 5:10-cv-02863-EJD
ORDER RE: MOTION TO SEAL

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

563-29

Brandwajn Declaration

Docket No.
563-30

Exhibit 8 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-31

Exhibit 9 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-32

Exhibit 10 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-33

Exhibit 11 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-34

Exhibit 12 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket No.
563-35

Exhibit 13 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

Highlighted portions
SEALED.

Docket No.
563-36

Exhibit 14 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

Highlighted portions
SEALED.

Docket No.
563-37

Exhibit 16 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

UNSEALED.

Docket
Nos. 56338; 563-39
Docket
Nos. 56340, 563-41

Exhibit 18 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

SEALED.

Exhibit 19 to the
Brandwajn Declaration

SEALED.

confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical or
business information.
Sealed portions narrowly
tailored to confidential technical
information and supported by a
declaration.
Sealed portions narrowly
tailored to confidential technical
information and supported by a
declaration.
Not narrowly tailored to
confidential technical
information and not supported
by a declaration.
Narrowly tailored to confidential
technical information and
supported by a declaration.
Narrowly tailored to confidential
technical information and
supported by a declaration.

Within seven days, the designating party may file a more narrowly tailored motion to file
under seal. Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 79-5, a proposed order must contain a chart specifically showing
what the party seeks to seal. An unredacted version must contain highlighting showing the court
what the designating party seeks to seal within that document.

23
24
25

SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 14, 2015
_________________________________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge

26
27
28
4
Case No.: 5:10-cv-02863-EJD
ORDER RE: MOTION TO SEAL