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

Filing 215

ORDER Granting Motion to File Under Seal AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT, ORDER re #211 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal filed by Apple Inc. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on September 12, 2011. (psglc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/12/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 HAROLD J. MCELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) hmcelhinny@mofo.com MICHAEL A. JACOBS (CA SBN 111664) mjacobs@mofo.com RICHARD S.J. HUNG (CA SBN 197425) rhung@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 7 8 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant APPLE INC. WILLIAM F. LEE william.lee@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 60 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 526-6000 Facsimile: (617) 526-5000 MARK D. SELWYN (SBN 244180) mark.selwyn@wilmerhale.com WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP 950 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304 Telephone: (650) 858-6000 Facsimile: (650) 858-6100 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN JOSE DIVISION 14 15 APPLE INC., a California corporation, Plaintiff, 16 17 18 19 20 v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A Korean business entity; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York corporation; SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company., Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING APPLE’S STIPULATED ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL CASE NO. 11-CV-01846-LHK sf-3042291 1 Plaintiff Apple Inc. (“Apple”) has moved to file the certain documents related to Apple’s 2 Opposition to Samsung’s Motion to Compel Regarding Request For Production No. 1 and 3 Interrogatory Nos. 1, 3, and 6 under seal. In support of the Administrative Motion, Apple has 4 filed the declaration required under Civil L.R. Rule 79-5 and General Order No. 62 to provide 5 evidence of good cause for this Court to permit filing under seal. The declaration establishes that 6 the information contained in the below documents has been designated as HIGHLY 7 CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY by Apple. Samsung does not oppose this 8 administrative motion. 9 10 11 Accordingly, for good cause shown, the Court ORDERS that the following documents shall be filed under seal: 1. The confidential, unredacted version of Apple’s Opposition to Samsung’s Motion to 12 Compel Regarding Request For Production No. 1 and Interrogatory Nos. 1, 3, and 6 13 (“Opposition”) 14 2. The Declaration of Christopher J. Stringer in Support of Apple Inc.’s Opposition to 15 Samsung’s Motion to Compel Regarding Request for Production No. 1 and Interrogatory Nos. 1, 16 3, and 6 (“Stringer Declaration”). 17 3. The confidential, unredacted version of The Declaration of Jason Bartlett in Support of 18 Apple Inc.’s Opposition to Samsung’s Motion to Compel Regarding Request for Production No. 19 1 and Interrogatory Nos. 1, 3, and 6 (“Bartlett Declaration”). 20 4. Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, H, I and J to the Bartlett Declaration. 21 5. The Declaration of Patrick Zhang in Support of Apple Inc.’s Opposition to Samsung’s 22 Motion to Compel Regarding Request for Production No. 1 and Interrogatory Nos. 1, 3, and 6 23 (“Zhang Declaration”). 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK sf-3042291 1 1 2 3 The Court further ORDERS that a redacted version of Apple’s Opposition to Samsung’s Motion to Compel and the Bartlett, Stringer, and Zhang Declarations shall be filed on ECF. IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: September 12, 2011 By: HONORABLE PAUL GREWAL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK sf-3042291 2

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?