Adaptix, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. et al

Filing 471

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL by Judge Paul S. Grewal re: (495), (498), (500), (507), (510), (512), (519), (520), (522), (530) in case 5:13-cv-01777-PSG; (423), (426), (433), (436), (438), (445), (446), (447), (453) in case 5:13-cv-01778-PSG; (426), (428), (430), (432), (443), (447), (449), (455), (456), (458), (468) in case 5:13-cv-01776-PSG; (392), (394), (396), (403), (406), (408), (414), (415), (416), (424) in case 5:13-cv-01844-PSG; (467), (470), (472), (480), (483), (485), (492), (493), (495), (501) in case 5:13-cv-02023-PSG (psglc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/23/2015)

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

ADAPTIX, INC.,
Plaintiff,

12
13
14

v.
APPLE INC., et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

ADAPTIX, INC.,

17
18
19

Plaintiff,
v.
APPLE INC., et al.,

20

Defendants.

21
22

ADAPTIX, INC.,
Plaintiff,

23
24
25
26

v.
AT&T MOBILITY LLC., et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:13-cv-01776-PSG

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:13-cv-01777-PSG

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:13-cv-01778-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS
TO SEAL
(Re: Docket Nos. 426, 428, 430, 432, 443,
447, 449, 455, 456, 458, 468)

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS
TO SEAL
(Re: Docket Nos. 495, 498, 500, 507, 510,
512, 519, 520, 522, 530)

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS
TO SEAL
(Re: Docket Nos. 423, 426, 433, 436, 438,
445, 446, 447, 453)

27
28
1
Case Nos. 5:13-cv-01776-PSG; -01777; 01778; -01844; -02023
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

1

ADAPTIX, INC.,
Plaintiff,

2
v.

3
4

CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a Verizon
Wireless, et al.,

5
6

Defendants.
ADAPTIX, INC.,

7

Plaintiff,

8
9

v.
APPLE INC., et al.,

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Defendants.

11

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:13-cv-01844-PSG
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS
TO SEAL
(Re: Docket Nos. 392, 394, 396, 403, 406,
408, 414, 415, 416, 424)

Case No. 5:13-cv-02023-PSG
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS
TO SEAL
(Re: Docket Nos. 467, 470, 472, 480, 483,
485, 492, 493, 495, 501)

Before the court are fifty administrative motions to seal several documents. “Historically,

12
13

courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents,

14

including judicial records and documents.’” 1 Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a

15

‘strong presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” 2 Parties seeking to seal judicial

16
17

records relating to dispositive motions bear the burden of overcoming the presumption with
“compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring

18
19

disclosure. 3
However, “while protecting the public's interest in access to the courts, we must remain

20
21

mindful of the parties' right to access those same courts upon terms which will not unduly harm

22

their competitive interest.” 4 Records attached to nondispositive motions therefore are not subject

23
24
25

1

Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v.
Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n. 7 (1978)).
2

Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)).

3

Id. at 1178-79.

4

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 727 F.3d 1214, 1228-29 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

26
27
28

2
Case Nos. 5:13-cv-01776-PSG; -01777; 01778; -01844; -02023
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

1

to the strong presumption of access. 5 Because the documents attached to nondispositive motions

2

“are often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action,” parties moving

3

to seal must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c). 6 As with dispositive motions, the

4

standard applicable to nondispositive motions requires a “particularized showing” 7 that “specific

5

prejudice or harm will result” if the information is disclosed. 8 “Broad allegations of harm,

6

unsubstantiated by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. 9 A protective order

7
8
9

sealing the documents during discovery may reflect the court’s previous determination that good
cause exists to keep the documents sealed, 10 but a blanket protective order that allows the parties to

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

designate confidential documents does not provide sufficient judicial scrutiny to determine whether

11

each particular document should remain sealed. 11

12
13
14

In addition to making particularized showings of good cause, parties moving to seal
documents must comply with the procedures established by Civ. L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to
Civ. L.R. 79-5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request that establishes the document

15
16
17

is “sealable,” or “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under
the law.” “The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material, and

18
19
20

5

See id. at 1180.

21

6

Id. at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted).

22

7

Id.

23

8

24

Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002);
see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).

9

25

Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992).

10

26

See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80.

11

27
28

See Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A) (“Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to
designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or
portions thereof, are sealable.”).
3
Case Nos. 5:13-cv-01776-PSG; -01777; 01778; -01844; -02023
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

court as required by
Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

1
2

430

Exhibit 7

UNSEALED

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

430

Exhibit 8

Designations highlighted in
yellow at Docket No. 434-3
SEALED except designations
highlighted in yellow at 453:819, 458:14-15, 459:5-6, 459:11,
459:15-18, 463:11-15, 464:3-23;
all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

430

Exhibit 9

SEALED

430

Exhibit 10

Designations highlighted in
green at Docket No. 430-11
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

430

Exhibit 11

Designations highlighted in red
at Docket No. 430-12 SEALED;
all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

430

Exhibit 12

Designations highlighted in
yellow, green and purple at
Docket No. 430-13 SEALED; all
other designations UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

430

Exhibit 13

Designations highlighted in
yellow and purple at Docket No.
430-14 SEALED; all other
designations UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

21

430

Exhibit 14

SEALED

22

430

Declaration of Christopher
A. Hughes

Designations highlighted in red
at Docket No. 430-16 SEALED;
all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

430

Declaration of Bryant C.
Boren, Jr.

Designations highlighted in red
at Docket No. 430-17 SEALED;
all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

432

Exhibit 2 – Defendants’
Motion for Attorneys’ Fees

Designations highlighted in red
blue and green at Docket No.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

23
24
25
26
27
28

5
Case Nos. 5:13-cv-01776-PSG; -01777; 01778; -01844; -02023
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

432-2 SEALED; all other
designations UNSEALED.

1
2

confidential business
information.

443

Adaptix’s Opposition to
Motion for Attorneys’ Fees

Designations highlighted in
yellow at Docket No. 443-3 and
designations highlighted in green
at Docket Nos. 453-1 and 454-1
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

443

Declaration of Nigel Jones

Designations highlighted in
green at Docket No. 454-2
SEALED; all other text
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

443

Exhibit C

SEALED

443

Exhibit F

Designations highlighted in
yellow at Docket No. 443-6
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

443

Exhibit G

Designations highlighted in
green at Docket No. 454-3
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

443

Exhibit H

Designations highlighted in
green at Docket No. 454-4
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

447

Adaptix’s Objections to
Apple’s Bill of Costs

UNSEALED

No declaration in
support filed with the
court as required by
Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

449

Adaptix’s Objections to
Cellco Partnership d/b/a
Verizon Wireless’ Bill of
Costs

UNSEALED

No declaration in
support filed with the
court as required by
Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

455

Exhibit 1 –Adaptix’s
Opposition

Designations highlighted in
yellow at Docket No. 455-2
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

455

Exhibit 2 – Declaration of
Nigel Jones

Designations highlighted in
yellow at Docket No. 455-3
SEALED; all other designations
UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions
narrowly tailored to
confidential business
information.

455

Exhibit 3 – Exhibit C

Designations highlighted in red

Only sealed portions

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

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

6
Case Nos. 5:13-cv-01776-PSG; -01777; 01778; -01844; -02023
OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL