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

Filing 514

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh denying #465 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal(lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/20/2011)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

APPLE, INC., a California corporation,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A
)
Korean corporation; SAMSUNG
)
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a New York )
corporation; SAMSUNG
)
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, )
a Delaware limited liability company,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)

Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL

Samsung filed an administrative motion to file parts of its opening Claim Construction

20

brief, and supporting documents and exhibits, under seal. ECF No. 465. Specifically, Samsung

21

seeks to seal an inventor deposition transcript (Cole Decl. Ex. 3) and engineering notes (Cole Decl.

22

Ex. 4), as well as additional documents that discuss or reference this evidence. Opening Claim

23

Construction Brief; Briggs Decl. Ex. F; Cole Declaration. Similarly, Samsung seeks to file under

24

seal the deposition testimony of another engineer regarding information available at the time of the

25

prosecution of the ‘792 patent. After reviewing the motion, declaration, and documents, the Court

26

DENIES Samsung’s administrative motion to file under seal.

27
28

In order to be sealable, a document must be “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or
otherwise entitled to protection under the law.” Civil L.R. 79-5. Based on the declaration provided
1
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL

1

to the Court, none of the information sought to be sealed appears to be protectable as trade secret,

2

nor does the information reflect the design and development of Samsung products, nor is it clear

3

how publication of this information would cause serious harm to Samsung, as is claimed in the

4

Arnold declaration. If Samsung believes that it can adequately support a motion to seal any of the

5

documents submitted, it shall file a new request to seal by Tuesday, December 27, 2011. If no

6

request is submitted, none of the information previously submitted for sealing will be sealed, and

7

Samsung shall file non-redacted versions of the relevant filings.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated: December 20, 2011

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL