Realtek Semiconductor Corporation v. LSI Corporation et al

Filing 106

Order by Hon. Ronald M. Whyte granting in part and denying in part 82 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal(rmwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/21/2013)

1
2
3
4

E-FILED on 5/21/13

5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR
CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
v.
LSI CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

No. C-12-03451 RMW
ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR ORDER PERMITTING
THE FILING UNDER SEAL OF
PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY AND
RELATED DOCUMENTS
[Re: Dkt. No. 82]

18
19
20

Plaintiff Realtek Semiconductor Corporation ("Realtek") submitted a request to file under

21

seal: (1) designated portions of its Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Stay; and (2) designated

22

portions of the Declaration of James A. Daire ("Daire Decl.") in support of its opposition and

23

Exhibits D-H thereto.

24

The plaintiff's reques is based–in large part–on the defendants' designation of the material as

25

"Confidential and/or Highly Confidential – Attorneys' Eyes Only" under the terms of the Protective

26

Order. Dkt. No. 82 at 1. Under the local rule, however, "[a] stipulation, or a blanket protective

27

order that allows a party to designate documents as sealable, will not suffice to allow the filing of

28
ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR ORDER PERMITTING THE FILING UNDER SEAL OF PLAINTIFF'S
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY AND RELATED DOCUMENTS—No. C-12-03451 RMW
ALG

1

documents under seal" for that reason alone. Civ. L.R. 79-5(a). With respect to the documents

2

designated by defendants as confidential in the protective order, the court does not believe that they

3

are in fact "privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the

4

law." Id. Moreover, the court has already denied defendants' motion to seal the vast majority of this

5

material in its earlier sealing motions. See Dkt. Nos. 90, 91, 97, 98.

6

With respect to Exhibit F to the Daire Decl., the court does not believe that Realtek's request

7

for a RAND license proposal from defendants after the ITC litigation commenced is confidential for

8

the purposes of this motion.

9

The court has already permitted the filing under seal of Exhibit G to the Daire Decl.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

The court hereby:

11

1. DENIES Realtek's motion to seal the designated portions of its Opposition to Defendants'

12
13

Motion to Stay;
2. DENIES Realtek's motion to seal designated portions of the Declaration of James A. Daire

14

("Daire Decl.") in support of its opposition and Exhibits D-F and H thereto; and

15

3. GRANTS Realtek's motion to seal Exhibit G to the Daire Decl.

16

In the event the defendant's failure to file the required declaration was in error, or Realtek

17

can offer a narrowly tailored sealing request explaining why its designated materials are in fact

18

"privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the law," the

19

court gives the parties until May 29, 2013 to file a narrowly tailored proposed sealing request with

20

respect to the documents above. Otherwise, the proposed filings not sealed above will be made part

21

of the public record.

22
23
24
25

DATED: May 21, 2013

RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge

26
27
28
ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR ORDER PERMITTING THE FILING UNDER SEAL OF PLAINTIFF'S
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY AND RELATED DOCUMENTS—No. C-12-03451 RMW
ALG
2