Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al

Filing 1109

MOTION TO STAY ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL, FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, AND TO SEAL DOCUMENTS filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.(a New York corporation), Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC(a Delaware limited liability company). Responses due by 7/5/2012. Replies due by 7/12/2012. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Anthony Alden, #2 Declaration of Hankil Kang, #3 Proposed Order)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 6/20/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION
11
APPLE INC., a California corporation,

CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK-PSG

12
Plaintiff,
13
vs.
14
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., a
15 Korean business entity; SAMSUNG
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New
16 York corporation; SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
17 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
18

[PROPOSED] ORDER VACATING JUNE
19 ORDER DENYING
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE
UNDER SEAL AND GRANTING
APPLE’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS
TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

Defendants.

19
20
Apple Inc. (“Apple”) filed several Administrative Motions to File Documents Under Seal
21
(Dkt. Nos. 769, 799, 822, 824, and 845). On June 19, 2012, the Court issued an Order denying
22
these motions (“the Order”) (Dkt. No. 1105) because the required declaration(s) had not been filed
23
pursuant to Civil L.R. 79-5.
24
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung
25

Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) have now filed an Emergency

26
Miscellaneous Administrative Request Pursuant To Civil L.R. 7-11 to stay the Order, for an
27
28

02198.51855/4819354.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
-1[PROPOSED] ORDER VACATING JUNE 19 ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE
UNDER SEAL GRANTING APPLE’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

1 extension of time to file the accompanying Declaration of Hankil Kang pursuant to Civil L.R. 792 5, and for an order granting in part Apple’s motions to file under seal.
3

Samsung asserts that the required declaration pursuant to Civil L.R. 79-5 was not filed

4 earlier due to an administrative oversight, and it corrected that error as soon as it became aware of
5 it. The Declaration of Hankil Kang, albeit late, establishes good cause for this Court to permit
6 certain documents to be filed under seal.

The Declaration establishes that the below documents

7 contain information that is highly confidential and has been designated by Samsung as HIGHLY
8 CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY under the Protective Order in this action.

The

9 filing of these documents in the public record would cause significant competitive injury to
10 Samsung.
11

Accordingly, for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS Samsung’s Emergency

12 Miscellaneous Administrative Request, VACATES its June 19, 2012 Order, and ORDERS that the
13 following documents shall be filed under seal:
14

1. The confidential, unredacted version of Apple’s Reply in Support of Motion for

15

Rule 37(b)(2) Sanctions for Samsung’s Violation of Two Discovery Orders;

16

2. The confidential, unredacted version of the Reply Declaration of Minn Chung in

17

Support of Apple’s Motion for Rule 37(b)(2) Sanctions for Samsung’s Violation of

18

Two Discovery Orders, and Exhibits A to S thereto;

19

3. Exhibit 2 to the Reply Declaration of Eric J. Olson in Support of Apple’s Motion

20

for Rule 37(b)(2) Sanctions for Samsung’s Violation of Two Discovery Orders;

21

4. The confidential, unredacted version of Apple’s Combined Reply in Support of Its

22

Motion to Compel Depositions of Samsung’s Purported “Apex” Witnesses and

23

Opposition to Samsung’s Motion for a Protective Order (“Apple’s Apex Reply”);

24

5. The confidential, unredacted version of the Declaration of Mia Mazza in Support of

25

Apple’s Apex Reply, and Exhibits 5-32, 34, 35, and 38-40 thereto;

26
27
28

02198.51855/4819354.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
-2[PROPOSED] ORDER VACATING JUNE 19 ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE
UNDER SEAL GRANTING APPLE’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

1

6. The confidential, unredacted version of Apple’s Reply Brief in Support of Rule

2

37(b)(2) Motion Re: Samsung’s Violation of January 27, 2012 Damages Discovery

3

Order;

4

7. The confidential, unredacted version of the Declaration of Erik J. Olson in Support

5

of Apple’s Reply in Support of Rule 37(B)(2) Motion Re: Samsung’s Violation of

6

January 27, 2012 Damages Discovery Order, and Exhibits A, D, and I thereto;

7

8. The confidential, unredacted version of the Declaration of Eric R. Roberts in

8

Support of Apple’s Reply in Support of Rule 37(b)(2) Motion Re: Samsung’s

9

Violation of January 27, 2012 Damages Discovery Order, and Exhibits A - C

10

thereto;

11

9. Exhibits 10 and 13-18 to the Declaration of Grant Kim in Support of Apple’s Reply

12

in Support of Rule 37(b)(2) Motion Re: Samsung’s Violation of January 27, 2012

13

Damages Discovery Order; and

14

10. Exhibit D to the Reply Declaration of Marc J. Pernick in Support of Apple’s Rule

15

37(b)(2) Motion Based on Samsung’s Violation of the Court’s December 22, 2011

16

Order Regarding Source Code.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20 DATED:

______________, 2012

21
22
23

Honorable Paul S. Grewal
United States Magistrate Judge

24
25
26
27
28

02198.51855/4819354.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK (PSG)
-3[PROPOSED] ORDER VACATING JUNE 19 ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE
UNDER SEAL GRANTING APPLE’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL