GSI Technology, Inc. v. Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

Filing 200

ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL granting in part and denying in part 101 , 151 Administrative Motions to File Under Seal; granting 190 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal; denying 192 Administrative Motion to Fi le Under Seal. Any party affected by this order may move for reconsideration on or before 10/24/2014 but in doing so must explain how it timely complied with all of the requirements of Civil Local Rule 79-5 for any particular designation. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 10/17/2014. (ejdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/17/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

10
11

GSI TECHNOLOGY, INC.,

Case No. 5:11-cv-03613 EJD

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Plaintiff,
ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL

12
v.
13
14

CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR
CORPORATION,
Defendant.

15
16

Re: Dkt. Nos. 101, 151, 190, 192

Presently before the court are four administrative motions for leave to file certain matters

17

under seal. See Docket Item Nos. 101, 151, 190, 192. On those motions, the court rules as

18

follows:

19

1. Defendant’s Motion to File Under Seal Documents Designated as Confidential by

20

Other Parties (Docket Item No. 101) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

21

The motion is denied as to Page 4, Footnote 3 of Defendant’s Motion for Summary

22

Judgment and as to Exhibits 81 and 82 of the Rubin Declaration in support of the

23

Motion for Summary Judgment. The motion is also denied as to any designations from

24

IDT, Renesas and Micron because the court is unable to locate an appropriate

25

declaration from these parties pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5. The motion is

26

granted in all other aspects.

27
28

2. Plaintiff’s Motion to File Under Seal Documents Designated as Confidential by Other
Parties (Docket Item No. 151) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The
Case No. 5:11-cv-03613 EJD
ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL

1

motion is denied as to any designations from Defendant, IDT and Micron because the

2

court is unable to locate an appropriate declaration from these parties pursuant to Civil

3

Local Rule 79-5. The motion is granted in all other aspects.

4

3. Plaintiff’s Motion to File Under Seal its Responses to Evidentiary Objections (Docket
Item No. 190) is GRANTED.

5
6

4. Defendant’s Motion to File Under Seal portions of its opposition to Plaintiff’s Request
for Leave to File Responses to Evidentiary Objections (Docket Item No. 192) is

7

DENIED because the court is unable to locate an appropriate declaration to support the

8

designations pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5.

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Because the court may have overlooked something in these extensive sealing requests, any
party affected by this order may move for reconsideration on or before October 24, 2014, but in
doing so must explain how it timely complied with all of the requirements of Civil Local Rule 795 for any particular designation. Failure to do so will result in the denial of any reconsideration
request.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 17, 2014
______________________________________
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Case No. 5:11-cv-03613 EJD
ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE UNDER SEAL