Finisar Corporation v. Nistica, Inc.

Filing 513

OMNIBUS ORDER REGARDING 437 , 444 , 445 , 455 , 458 , 461 , 471 , 474 , 481 SEALING MOTIONS. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 4/5/2016. (blflc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/5/2016)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

FINISAR CORPORATION,

Case No. 13-cv-03345-BLF

Plaintiff,
8
v.

OMNIBUS ORDER REGARDING
SEALING MOTIONS

9
10

NISTICA, INC.,

[Re: ECF 437, 444, 445, 455, 458, 461, 471,

Defendant.
474, 481]

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Before the Court are nine administrative motions to file under seal in connection with the

13
14

Special Master’s Report and Recommendations regarding the parties’ Motions for Summary

15

Judgment, ECF 437, 444, 445, 455, 458, 461, and Motions in Limine, ECF 471, 474, 481. For the

16

reasons stated herein, the motions are GRANTED.

17

I.

LEGAL STANDARD

18

Unless a particular court record is one ‘traditionally kept secret,’” a “strong presumption in

19

favor of access” to judicial records “is the starting point.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu,

20

447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d

21

1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). A party seeking to seal judicial records relating to a dispositive

22

motion bears the burden of overcoming this presumption by articulating “compelling reasons

23

supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public

24

policies favoring disclosure.” Id. at 1178-79. Motions that are technically nondispositive may

25

still require the party to meet the “compelling reasons” standard when the motion is more than

26

tangentially related to the merits of the case. See Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809

27

F.3d 1092, 1101 (9th Cir. 2016). This standard is invoked “even if the dispositive motion, or its

28

attachments, were previously filed under seal or protective order.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179

1

(citing Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1136). Compelling reasons for sealing court files generally exist when

2

such “‘court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes,’ such as the use of records

3

to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade

4

secrets.” Id. (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)). However,

5

“[t]he mere fact that the production of records may lead to a litigant’s embarrassment,

6

incrimination, or exposure to further litigation will not, without more, compel the court to seal its

7

records.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179.
In this District, parties seeking to seal judicial records must furthermore follow Civil Local

8
9

Rule 79-5, which requires, inter alia, that a sealing request be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing
only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b) (emphasis added). Where the submitting party

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

seeks to file under seal a document designated confidential by another party, the burden of

12

articulating compelling reasons for sealing is placed on the designating party. Id. 79-5(e).

13
14

II.

DISCUSSION
The Court has reviewed the parties’ sealing motions and the declarations of the designating

15

parties submitted in support. The Court finds the parties have articulated compelling reasons to

16

seal certain portions of the submitted documents. The proposed redactions are also narrowly

17

tailored. The Court’s rulings on the sealing requests are set forth in the tables below:

18

A. ECF 437
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of the Report and
Recommendations of the
Special Master regarding
Motions for Summary
Judgment

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Description of Documents
Contains Defendant’s
confidential, trade secret, and
proprietary information
regarding the accused
products, development, and
engineering practices that
could cause competitive harm
if disclosed; Contains
Plaintiff’s confidential
information regarding business
strategies that could cause
competitive harm if publicly
disclosed

27
28
2

Court’s Order
GRANTED

1
2
3

B. ECF 444
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of Plaintiff Finisar’s
objections to Special Master’s
Report and Recommendations

GRANTED

Exhibit 1; Transcript of the
Summary Judgment hearing
before the Special Master on
January 11, 2016

Contains confidential
information regarding Plaintiff
Finisar’s business strategies;
competitive harm would result
if disclosed

GRANTED

Exhibit 2; Transcript of
Evidentiary Objections hearing
before the Special Master on
January 27, 2016

Contains confidential and
proprietary information
regarding Nistica’s products,
finances, and sensitive
business strategies and plans.
Nistica would face the risk of
competitive harm if this
information were to become
public.
Contains confidential
information regarding Plaintiff
Finisar’s business strategies;
competitive harm would result
if publicly disclosed

GRANTED

Contains confidential and
proprietary information
regarding Nistica’s products,
sales, and sensitive business
strategies and plans. Nistica
would face the risk of
competitive harm if
this information were to
become public
Contains confidential and
proprietary information
regarding Nistica’s products,
sales, and sensitive business
strategies and plans. Nistica
would face the risk of
competitive harm if
this information were to
become public

GRANTED

5

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16

Exhibit 3; Plaintiff Finisar’s
Summary Judgment Slides of
morning session of Summary
Judgment hearing

17
18
19
20

Exhibit 4; Plaintiff Finisar’s
Summary Judgment Slides of
afternoon session of Summary
Judgment hearing

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Court’s Order

Contains confidential,
proprietary, and sensitive
technical from the Exhibits
below; competitive harm
would result if publicly
disclosed

4

6

Description of Documents

Exhibit 5; Plaintiff Finisar’s
Summary Judgment Slides in
Presentation Mode

3

GRANTED

GRANTED

1
2

Exhibit 10; Chart of Map of
Plaintiff Finisar’s objections to
the Special Master’s Report
and Recommendations

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

C. ECF 445
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of Defendant
Nistica’s objections to Special
Master’s Report and
Recommendations
Exhibits 2, 7, 10, 11, 14, 1720, 22, 24-26 to the Russell
Tonkovich Declaration in
support of Defendant Nistica’s
Objection

12
13
14

Exhibits 3, 4, 13, 15 to Russell
Tonkovich Declaration

Contains confidential and
proprietary information
regarding Nistica’s products.
Nistica would face the risk of
competitive harm if this
information were to become
public.
Description of Documents

GRANTED

Court’s Order

Contains confidential,
proprietary

GRANTED

Contains Defendant Nistica’s
confidential, trade secret, and
proprietary information
relating to its products,
development, and engineering
practices; Defendant would
suffer competitive injury if
publicly disclosed
Discloses third party
confidential information

GRANTED

GRANTED

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

D. ECF 455
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of Defendant
Nistica’s Response to Plaintiff
Finisar’s Objections to the
Report and Recommendations
of Special Master regarding
Motions for Summary
Judgment
Exhibits 2-7, 13-22 to the
Kramer Declaration in support
of Defendant Nistica’s
Response

Description of Documents

Court’s Order

Contains Defendant’s
confidential, trade secret,
proprietary, and information;
Defendant would suffer
competitive injury if publicly
disclosed;

GRANTED

Contains confidential
information and sensitive
business strategies and public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

GRANTED

25
26
27
28

E. ECF 458
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of Plaintiff Finisar’s
Response to Nistica’s

Description of Documents
Addresses, quotes from, cites,
and discusses Nistica’s
4

Court’s Order
GRANTED

1

Objection to Special Master’s
Report and Recommendations

2

confidential and proprietary
technical information
concerning the architecture and
operation of Nistica’s products

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

F. ECF 461
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of Corrected Report
and Recommendations of
Special Master Regarding
Motions for Summary
Judgment
G. ECF 471
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of the Proposed Joint
Pretrial Statement and Order

Description of Documents
Contains confidential
information and sensitive
business strategies and public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

Description of Documents

Court’s Order
GRANTED

Court’s Order

Contains confidential and
sensitive financial information;
public disclosure could result
in competitive harm

GRANTED

Portions of Appendix A to
Proposed Joint Pretrial
Statement and Order; Expert
reports of Dr. Katherine Hall,
Dr. Michael Tate, and Dr.
Benjamin Goldberg

Contains confidential and
proprietary business, technical,
and financial information;
public disclosure could result
in competitive harm

GRANTED

Portions of Appendix B to
Proposed Joint Pretrial
Statement and Order; Expert
reports from Thomas C.
Bennett, Dr. Keith Gooseen,
and Nisha M. Mody.

Contains confidential and
proprietary business, technical,
and financial information;
public disclosure could result
in competitive harm

GRANTED

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

H. ECF 474
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Exhibits 1-3, 7 in support of
the Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion
in Limine No. 1; Excerpts of
the deposition transcripts of
Christopher Brown, Jerry S.
Rawls, Todd Swanson, and
James Sirkis, Ph.D

Description of Documents
Contains confidential
information regarding
confidential technical and
business information
concerning business strategies
and plans, and sensitive
commercial information
regarding third parties to this
action; public disclosure could
result in competitive harm
5

Court’s Order
GRANTED

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Exhibit 4 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 1; Supplemental
Expert Rebuttal Report of
Nisha M. Mody, Ph.D., dated
November 9, 2015

Contains confidential
information regarding
Plaintiff’s business strategies
and plans; public disclosure
could result in competitive
harm

GRANTED

Exhibit 5 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 1; the Patent
Purchase Agreement between
Finisar Corporation and
CiDRA Corporate Services

Contains confidential and
proprietary information
regarding business strategies
and plans of Plaintiff and third
party; public disclosure could
cause competitive harm

GRANTED

Exhibit 6 in support of the
Finisar’s Motion in Limine No.
1; Supplemental Expert Report
of Michael E. Tate, dated
October 16, 2015

Contains confidential
information regarding
Plaintiff’s business strategies
and plans; public disclosure
could cause competitive harm

GRANTED

Portions of Plaintiff Finisar’s
Motion in Limine No. 1; cites
to or quotes from Exhibits 1-7

Cites and quotes to Plaintiff
and third party confidential,
proprietary, and sensitive
information in the
abovementioned Exhibits
Exhibit 1 in support of Plaintiff Contains confidential technical
Finisar’s Motion in Limine No. information regarding
3; Defendant’s Supplemental
Nistica’s products that could
Responses and Objections to
cause significant competitive
Plaintiff Finisar Corporation’s harm to Nistica if disclosed to
Interrogatory No. 18
the public

GRANTED

Exhibit 7 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 3; correspondence
between counsel for Finisar
and counsel for Nistica, dated
October 12, 2015

Contains confidential technical
information regarding
Nistica’s products that could
cause significant competitive
harm to Nistica if disclosed to
the public

GRANTED

Exhibit 8 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 3; correspondence
between counsel for Finisar
and counsel for Nistica, dated
October 29, 2015

C Contains confidential
technical information
regarding Nistica’s products
that could cause significant
competitive harm to Nistica if
disclosed to the public

GRANTED

Contains confidential
information regarding
confidential technical and
business information; public
disclosure could cause
competitive harm

GRANTED

27

Exhibit 10 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 3; excerpt of the
deposition transcript of Keith
Goossen, Ph.D. (October 21,
2015)

28

Portions of Plaintiff Finisar’s

Cites and quotes to Plaintiff

GRANTED

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

6

GRANTED

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Motion in Limine No. 3

and third party confidential,
proprietary, and sensitive
information in the
abovementioned Exhibits
(Exhibits 1, 7, 8, and 10 in
support of Plaintiff’s Motion in
Limine No. 3)
Exhibits 1, 4 in support of the
Contains confidential
GRANTED
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
information regarding
Limine No. 4; excerpts of the
Plaintiff’s business strategies
transcripts to the depositions of and plans; public disclosure
Jerry Rawls (July 31, 2015)
could cause competitive harm
and Christopher Brown (June
9, 2015)
Exhibits 2, 3 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 4; internal Finisar
emails dated September 8,
2011 and July 26, 2013

Contains confidential
information regarding
Plaintiff’s business strategies
and plans; public disclosure
could cause competitive harm

GRANTED

Portions of Plaintiff Finisar’s
Motion in Limine No. 4

Cites and quotes to Plaintiff
confidential, proprietary, and
sensitive information in the
abovementioned Exhibits
(Exhibits 1-4 in support of
Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine
No. 4)
Contain confidential and
proprietary technical
information regarding
Plaintiff’s products

GRANTED

Cites and quotes to Plaintiff
confidential, proprietary, and
sensitive information in the
abovementioned Exhibits
(Exhibits 1, 2 in support of
Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine
No. 5)

GRANTED

13
14
15
16
17
18

Exhibits 1, 2 in support of the
Plaintiff Finisar’s Motion in
Limine No. 5; internal Finisar
emails dated January 10, 2013
and April 9, 2013
Portions of Plaintiff Finisar’s
Motion in Limine No. 5

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

I. ECF 481
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Portions of the Nistica’s
Motions in Limine Nos. 1-5;

Description of Documents
Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

28
7

GRANTED

Court’s Order
GRANTED

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Exhibits 2-4 to the Declaration
of Robert Kramer in Support
of Nistica’s Motion in Limine
No. 1

Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm
Declaration of Thomas Bennett Contains confidential, trade
in Support of Nistica’s Motion secret, and proprietary product
in Limine No. 1
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

GRANTED

Exhibits 1-2 to the Declaration
of Thomas Bennett in Support
of Nistica’s Motion in Limine
No. 1

Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

GRANTED

Exhibits 1-2 to the Declaration
of Robert Kramer in Support
of Nistica’s Motion in Limine
No. 2

Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

GRANTED

Exhibits 1-4 and 6-11 to the
Declaration of Robert Kramer
in Support of Nistica’s Motion
in Limine No. 3;

Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of
Robert Kramer in Support of
Nistica’s Motion in Limine No.
4

Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
8

GRANTED

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

GRANTED

marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

1
2
3
4

Exhibits 1-4 to the Declaration
of Robert Kramer in Support
of Nistica’s Motion in Limine
No. 5

5
6
7

Contains confidential, trade
secret, and proprietary product
information relating to
Defendant’s products, as well
as projects, engineering
practices, business, and
marketing information; public
disclosure could result in
competitive harm

GRANTED

8
9
10

III.

ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, the sealing motions at ECF 437, 445, 455, 458, 461, 471, 474,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

and 481 are GRANTED. Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(2), for any request that has been denied

12

because the party designating a document as confidential or subject to a protective order has not

13

provided sufficient reasons to seal, the submitting party must file the unredacted (or lesser

14

redacted) documents into the public record no earlier than 4 days and no later than 10 days form

15

the filing of this order.

16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 5, 2016
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9