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

Filing 891

MOTION to Seal Portions of Hearing Transcript re #855 Transcript,, filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.(a New York corporation), Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC(a Delaware limited liability company). Motion Hearing set for 6/5/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 4th Floor, San Jose before Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal. Responses due by 5/11/2012. Replies due by 5/18/2012. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Granting Motion to Seal Portions of Hearing Transcript Under General Order 59)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 4/27/2012)

1 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Charles K. Verhoeven (Cal. Bar No. 170151)
 [e-mail]
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
 San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 Kevin P.B. Johnson (Cal. Bar No. 177129)
[e-mail]
 Victoria F. Maroulis (Cal. Bar No. 202603)
[e-mail]
 555 Twin Dolphin Drive 5th Floor
Redwood Shores, California 94065
 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

Michael T. Zeller (Cal. Bar No. 196417)
 [e-mail]
865 S. Figueroa St., 10th Floor
 Los Angeles, California 90017
Telephone: [phone]
 Facsimile: [phone]
 Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
 AMERICA, INC. and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION

 APPLE INC., a California corporation,

CASE NO. 11-cv-01846-LHK



SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO SEAL
PORTIONS OF THE MARCH 27, 2012
HEARING TRANSCRIPT (DKT. 855)
PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER NO.
59



Plaintiff,
vs.

 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,

Defendants.


Date:
Time:
Place:
Judge:

June 5, 2012
10:00 a.m.
Courtroom 5, 4th Floor
Hon. Paul S. Grewal




02198.51887/4726684.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF HEARING TRANSCRIPT

1

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION

2

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

3

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on June 5, 2012 at 10:00 a.m., or as soon as the matter may

4 be heard by the Honorable Paul S. Grewal in Courtroom 5, United States District Court for the
5 Northern District of California, Robert F. Peckham Federal Building, 280 South 1st Street, San
6 Jose, California 95113, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and
7 Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) shall and hereby do move
8 the Court for an order pursuant to General Order 59 sealing portions of the Transcript of
9 Proceedings Before the Honorable Paul S. Grewal, United States Magistrate Judge, dated March
10 27, 2012 (Dkt. 855) (“Transcript”).
11

This motion is based on this Notice of Motion and supporting memorandum of points and

12 authorities.
13

//

14

//

15

//

16

//

17

//

18

//

19

//

20

//

21

//

22

//

23

//

24

//

25

//

26

//

27

//

28

//

02198.51887/4726684.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF HEARING TRANSCRIPT

-1-

1
2

RELIEF REQUESTED
Pursuant to General Order No. 59, Samsung requests that the Court issue an order sealing

3 the following portions of the Transcript:
4
5

Morning Session (Page:Lines)

Afternoon Session (Page:Lines)

6

13:20-25
14:10-15, 18-25
15:5, 15-22
16:3-5, 15-17
17:16-20
18:1-9, 12-13, 17-19
22:16-17, 20
23:1
24:3
27:1-7
30:1-4, 9-12, 20-21
31:5-8, 10-12, 18, 20-21
32:6-8
33:3-6, 9-11, 15-21, 24-25
34:1-5, 8-11, 21-25
35: 1-2, 17-19, 22
36:3-6, 23-24
37:11-12, 14-17, 19-24
38:11-13, 22-23
39:18-25
40:1
41:17-20
42:2-4, 20-23
43:8, 14, 16-21, 23-25
44:1, 3-7, 10-12, 21-25
45:2-4, 12-14
46:2-4, 7-11, 18
47:8-10, 12-15, 22-23, 25
48:1, 11-13, 15-19
49:2-5, 8-12
51:6-9
52:1-4, 23-25
53:2-3, 4-10, 12-17, 23-25
54:1-2
55:6-10

63:8-12, 19-25
64:1-9, 12-16, 21-25
68:5-6, 8-9, 16-19, 22-25
69:3-8
70:10-25
71:1, 5-6, 21-24
72:6-12, 19-21
73:8-9, 12-13, 17-18
76:13-16
77:17-22
78:3-5
79:7-8
86:9-13
88:19-21
96:23-24
97:13-14, 25
98:1-2
104:5-7
121:24-25
122:1
140:2-5
142:3-5

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
While the public generally has a common-law right to access judicial records in a civil

27 case, access is denied where there is a “likelihood of an improper use, ‘including publication of
28 . . . trade secret materials.’” Valley Broadcasting Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for Dist. of Nevada, 798
02198.51887/4726684.1
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
-2SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF HEARING TRANSCRIPT

1 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1986) (citing United States v. Criden (In re National Broadcasting Co.),
2 648 F.2d 814, 830 (3d Cir. 1981) (Weis, J., concurring)); see also Nixon v. Warner
3 Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978) (noting that the “right to inspect and copy
4 judicial records is not absolute” and that “courts have refused to permit their files to serve as
5 reservoirs of . . . sources of business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive
6 standing”). The right to access is further diminished where, as here, a party seeks to prevent the
7 disclosure of information discussed during a hearing on a nondispositive discovery motion. Cf.
8 Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2002)
9 (noting that a “strong presumption of access” does not apply to sealed discovery documents
10 attached to nondispositive motions and that a “party seeking disclosure must present sufficiently
11 compelling reasons why the sealed discovery document should be released”).

Nondispositive

12 motions are “unrelated, or only tangentially related to the underlying cause of action.” Kamakana
13 v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal citations omitted).
14 Thus, the “public has less of a need for access” to the information. Id.
Samsung has established good cause to permit sealing portions of the Transcript.1

15

See

16 Phillips, 307 F.3d at 1213 (noting that “[w]hen a court grants a protective order for information
17 produced during discovery, it already has determined that ‘good cause’ exists to protect this
18 information from being disclosed to the public”).

The lines identified above discuss or refer to

19 the contents of documents and deposition transcripts that contain confidential and commercially
20 sensitive business information and were thus designated by Samsung as HIGHLY
21 CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEY’S EYES ONLY under the Protective Order. See Declarations
22 of Hankil Kang in Support of Samsung’s Motion to File Documents Under Seal (Dkts. 754, 773,
23 and 819); Declarations of Melissa Chan in Support of Apple’s and Samsung’s Administrative
24 Motions to File Documents Under Seal (Dkts. 739, 758, and 791); see also Dkt. 687.
25
26
27
28
02198.51887/4726684.1

1

The Court has already recognized that “many of the facts supporting each party’s
position” – the facts discussed during the hearing – “may be subject to sealing.” (Dkt. 850 at 5.)
Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF HEARING TRANSCRIPT

-3-

1

A copy of the Transcript with the lines Samsung requests that the Court seal highlighted

2 will be served on all parties in conjunction with this motion.
3

Accordingly, the Court should grant Samsung’s motion and issue an order sealing portions

4 of the Transcript as identified supra.
5
6 DATED: April 27, 2012
7

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

By

/s/ Victoria Maroulis
Charles K. Verhoeven
Kevin P.B. Johnson
Victoria F. Maroulis
Michael T. Zeller
Attorneys for SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,
LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
INC., and SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02198.51887/4726684.1

Case No. 11-cv-01846-LHK
SAMSUNG’S MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF HEARING TRANSCRIPT

-4-