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

Filing 763

ORDER by Judge Lucy H. Koh granting #519 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; granting #530 Motion for Reconsideration ; granting #547 Motion for Reconsideration (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

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 GRANTING SAMSUNG’S
MOTIONS TO RECONSIDER,
GRANTING APPLE’S MOTION TO
SEAL

Samsung filed a motion to reconsider this Court’s order denying its motion to file under

20

seal Exhibit E of the Chung Declaration filed in support of Apple’s Motion to Augment the Record

21

on its Motion for Preliminary Injunction (“Motion to Augment the Record”). ECF Nos. 530

22

(motion to reconsider) and 510 (Order). Exhibit E of the Chung Declaration contains a survey

23

conducted by Samsung that contains information regarding consumer design preferences.

24

Samsung also filed a motion to reconsider this Court’s order denying its motion to file under seal

25

Exhibit V of the Tung Declaration. ECF Nos. 547 (motion to reconsider) and 515 (Order). On

26

reconsideration, Samsung seeks to seal portions of the deposition testimony of Justin Denison

27

regarding an agreement (which includes a non-disclosure provision) between Best Buy and

28

Samsung.
1
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER RE: SAMSUNG’S MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION; APPLE’S SEALING MOTION

1

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(a), orders to seal “may issue only upon a request that

2

establishes that the document, or portions thereof, is privileged or protectable as trade secret or

3

otherwise entitled to protection under the law.” After review of the document and the supporting

4

declaration, the Court is satisfied that Samsung’s consumer survey is properly sealable. The

5

consumer survey contains information that, if disclosed, would allow Samsung’s competitors

6

access to and insight into Samsung’s design decisions. See Nixon v. Warner Comm’ns, 435 U.S.

7

589, 598 (1978) (citing Schmedding v. May, 85 Mich. 1, 5–6 (1891) and Flexmir, Inc. v. Herman,

8

40 A.2d 799, 800 (N.J. Ch. 1945)) (explaining that access to court documents has been denied

9

where the documents contain business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

standing).

11

Similarly, the portion of the deposition transcript that Samsung seeks to seal contains

12

information that is subject to a nondisclosure agreement between Samsung and a third party.

13

Further, Samsung’s General Counsel has submitted a declaration explaining that the business

14

relationship between Samsung and Best Buy would be compromised if the confidentiality of the

15

communications were not retained. Robinson Decl. ¶ 3, ECF No. 547-1. The Court finds that the

16

portion of the Denison declaration is properly sealable.

17

Relatedly, the Court initially granted Apple’s motion to file Exhibits A-D of the Chung

18

Declaration under seal. ECF No. 510. Because the Court’s order granted the sealing request with

19

respect to Exhibits A-D, but denied the sealing request with respect to Exhibit E, Apple’s request to

20

seal its Motion to Augment Record on Its Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which referenced and

21

discussed all five exhibits, was overly broad. Apple was allowed to refile its administrative motion

22

to seal its Motion to Augment the Record in light of the fact that the Court had denied the request

23

to file Exhibit E under seal. ECF No. 510. Apple re-filed its administrative motion to file under

24

seal its Motion to Augment the Record, but lodged with the Court the unredacted copy of the

25

Motion to Augment the Record, and the Chung declaration in support thereof, until such time as

26

the Court ruled on Samsung’s motion to reconsider the sealing order with respect to Exhibit E.

27

ECF No. 519. Apple’s administrative motion to file under seal portions of its Motion to Augment

28

the Record, as well as portions of the Chung declaration is GRANTED as this motion complies
2
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER RE: SAMSUNG’S MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION; APPLE’S SEALING MOTION

1

with the Court’s Order at ECF No. 510, allowing Exhibits A-D to be filed under seal. Moreover, in

2

light of this Court’s order regarding Samsung’s motion to reconsider, the portions of Apple’s

3

Motion to Augment the Record and the Chung declaration, which quote and discuss Exhibit E, are

4

likewise sealable. Accordingly, Section B.2. of Apple’s Motion to Augment the Record, as well

5

as the second sentence of paragraph 7 of the Chung declaration, which quote and discuss Exhibit E,

6

may be sealed.

7

For the reasons discussed above, the Court GRANTS Samsung’s motions to reconsider.

8

The Court also GRANTS Apple’s motion to file under seal portions of its Motion to Augment the

9

Record, and portions of the Chung declaration. Samsung shall file Exhibit E of the Chung

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Declaration and Exhibit V of the Tung Declaration under seal. The redacted version of Exhibit V

11

of the Tung Declaration at ECF No. 547-2 shall be deemed filed. Finally, Apple shall file its

12

Motion to Augment the Record and the Chung Declaration under seal. Apple shall also file a

13

redacted version of these documents, in accordance with the directions described above.

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

Dated: March 1, 2012

16

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No.: 11-CV-01846-LHK
ORDER RE: SAMSUNG’S MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION; APPLE’S SEALING MOTION