Cisco Systems Inc-v-Arista Networks, Inc

Filing 487

OMNIBUS ORDER REGARDING 371 , 378 , 393 , 396 , 331 SEALING MOTIONS TO MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 8/24/2016. (blflc4S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2016)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

CISCO SYSTEMS INC,

Case No. 14-cv-05344-BLF

Plaintiff,
8

OMNIBUS ORDER REGARDING
SEALING MOTIONS TO MOTIONS
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
9
10

ARISTA NETWORKS, INC.,

[Re: ECF 331, 371, 378, 393, 396]

Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
Before the Court are the parties’ administrative motions to file under seal portions of their

13
14

briefing and exhibits in connection with the parties’ motions for summary judgment. ECF 331,

15

371, 378, 393, 396. For the reasons stated below, the motions are GRANTED IN PART AND

16

DENIED IN PART.

17

I.

LEGAL STANDARD

18

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

19

documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of Honolulu,

20

447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597

21

& n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are “more than

22

tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of “compelling

23

reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1101–02 (9th Cir.

24

2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed upon a lesser showing

25

of “good cause.” Id. at 1097. In addition, sealing motions filed in this district must be “narrowly

26

tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). A party moving to seal a

27

document in whole or in part must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is

28

“sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a

1

party to designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document,

2

or portions thereof, are sealable.” Id.

3

II.

DISCUSSION

4

The Court has reviewed the parties’ sealing motions and respective declarations in support

5

thereof. The Court finds the parties have articulated compelling reasons to seal certain portions of

6

most of the submitted documents. The proposed redactions are also narrowly tailored. The Court’s

7

rulings on the sealing request are set forth in the tables below:

8

A.
ECF 331
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Exhibit 10 to the Declaration
of Eduardo E. Santacana In
Support of Defendant Arista
Networks, Inc.’s Motion For
Partial Summary Judgment
Exhibit 11 to the Declaration
of Eduardo E. Santacana In
Support of Defendant Arista
Networks, Inc.’s Motion For
Partial Summary Judgment

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Exhibit 17 to the Declaration
of Eduardo E. Santacana In
Support of Defendant Arista
Networks, Inc.’s Motion For
Partial Summary Judgment
Exhibits 1–3, 7–9, 16, 18, 19,
and 22–24 to the Declaration
of Eduardo E. Santacana In
Support of Defendant Arista
Networks, Inc.’s Motion For
Partial Summary Judgment

Description of Documents

Court’s Order

362:16-371:16 of this
deposition excerpt represents
source code from a third party
and is related to source code
for Cisco products
55:2-56:18 and 157:8–159:17
of this deposition excerpt
represents discussion about
source code from a third party
as related to Cisco’s products
as well as a discussion of the
confidential development of
Cisco’s product architecture.
Contains a confidential
discussion of the development
of Cisco’s product architecture

GRANTED as to 362:16371:16 and DENIED as to
remainder.

The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.

DENIED.

B.
ECF 371
Identification of Documents
Description of Documents
to be Sealed
Cisco’s Opposition to Arista’s Quotes from or cites below
Motion for Partial Summary
exhibits
Judgment

28
2

GRANTED as to 55:2-56:18
and 157:8–159:17 and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED

Court’s Order
GRANTED to the extent it
quotes or cites information
that has been allowed to be
filed under seal and DENIED
as to remainder.

1
2
3

Exhibit 1 to the Declaration
of John M. Neukom in
Support of Cisco’s
Opposition to Arista’s Motion
for Partial Summary
Judgment

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Exhibit 2 to the Neukom
Declaration

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Exhibit 3 to the Neukom
Declaration

Excerpted testimony from
Page 235, line 1 through Page
236, line 3 discusses a
confidential, non-public
internal communication
between Arista support
engineers regarding the
Company’s customer support
and documentation policies
and priorities, and Page 237
discusses non-public
information regarding
Arista’s technical support
system and a discloses a
particular “bug” submission
in that internal system
These emails specifically
discuss several prospective
customers’ use of particular
networking equipment makes
and models (and identify
those non-parties by name),
those customers’ preferences
regarding the features on their
equipment, and the
investments made by those
customers on those features.
The email chain also
discloses Arista’s internal
strategies regarding its sales
efforts directed towards those
clients, and confidential
product
development/roadmap
information about Arista’s
products.
The email itself
(ARISTANDCA12228912)
does not need to be sealed,
but there are compelling
reasons to seal the
attachments to the email
(ARISTANDCA12228913 to
ARISTANDCA12228928)
because they disclose Arista’s
highly confidential customer
sales/solicitation scripts,
including specific
3

GRANTED as to 235:1236:3, 237 and DENIED as
to remainder.

GRANTED

GRANTED as to attachments
and DENIED as to
remainder.

1
2
3
4
5

Exhibit 4 to the Neukom
Declaration

6
7
8

Exhibit 36 to the Neukom
Declaration

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16

Exhibit 37 to the Neukom
Declaration

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Exhibit 51 to the Neukom
Declaration

responses that Arista sales
personnel will provide to
particular sales/solicitation
scenarios, and Arista’s sales
strategies for particular types
of customers
The email chain discusses
and reveals the detailed
results of private and
comprehensive testing of
Arista networking products.
It sets forth in detail the
strategic and technical
roadmap, including policies,
justifications, and approaches
for the design, development,
and architecture of Arista’s
networking devices. This
includes highly confidential
strategies for improving
Arista’s products over
competing products, and
comments about various
design decisions and their
advantages.
The email chain discusses the
development of specific
functionality in Arista’s
products and the internal
strategic decisionmaking
behind Arista’s development
of that product. There are
compelling reasons to seal the
entire exhibit because the
email chain reveals the
various design considerations
underlying the development
of a feature in Arista’s
products, and Arista
maintains its product
development process
(including why certain
engineering decisions were
made) as highly confidential.
Page 217, lines 21 through
25, refers to testimony
regarding the design and
development of a specifically
4

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED as to 217:21-25
and DENIED as to
remainder.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Exhibit 52 to the Neukom
Declaration
Exhibit 53 to the Neukom
Declaration
Exhibit 46 to the Neukom
Declaration

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Exhibit 6 to the Neukom
Declaration
Exhibit 9 to the Neukom
Declaration

Exhibit 1 to the Declaration
of Kevin Almeroth in Support
of Cisco’s Opposition to
Arista’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment

identified feature of Arista’s
products, and Arista
maintains that information
about its specific design
decisions as highly
confidential
Arista does not seek to file
this exhibit under seal
Arista does not seek to file
this exhibit under seal
Arista seeks to seal is on page
16, lines 2 through 26, which
provides Cisco’s observations
based upon its review of
Arista’s source code
Highlighted portions of this
exhibit includes Cisco’s
confidential source code
Discusses confidential
information about the
development and security of
Cisco’s products.
Last two lines of page 29 and
the first two lines of page 30
disclose the contents of an
internal and confidential
Arista design document that
pertains to the development
of its products.
The highlighted portions of
Paragraph 78 on page 31
disclose the substance of, and
quote directly from,
confidential customer
communications by Arista
relating to product support
and both product and
documentation development
The highlighted portions of
Paragraph 79 on pages 31and
32 disclose the substance of,
and quote directly from,
confidential internal
communications by Arista
relating to product support
and documentation
5

DENIED
DENIED
GRANTED as to 16:2-26 and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED as to the specific
portions mentioned in
preceding column and
DENIED as to remainder.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

development.
Paragraphs 83-86 contain
Cisco’s confidential source
code.
Page 49 contains confidential
information regarding
networking equipment used
by Arista’s customers.
Highlighted portions of
Paragraph 118 on page 56
disclose internal and
confidential Arista
communications regarding
feature-specific product
development decisions and
customer support
communications relating to
Arista products.
Paragraphs 138 and 142,
including the excerpted
deposition transcripts and
images taken from highly
confidential Arista documents
that are a part of those
paragraphs, should be sealed
in their entirety because they
discuss and reveal multiple
details regarding Arista’s
non-public, internal
competitive testing and
analysis procedures
underlying Arista’s product
design and development

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Highlighted portions of
Paragraphs 147 and 148,
including each of the bullet
points on pages 71 through 77
(which are part of Paragraph
148), should be sealed
because they discuss the
design and development of
specific features of Arista’s
products, and Arista
6

1
2

maintains that information
about its specific design
decisions as highly
confidential.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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

Footnote 102 should be
sealed because it quotes
testimony from an Arista
engineer regarding the design
and development of a
specifically identified feature
of Arista’s products.
Similarly, Footnote 118
should be sealed because it
quotes testimony from a
highly confidential internal
Arista communication that
discusses the design and
development of a specifically
identified feature of Arista’s
products.
Paragraphs 149 through 151,
including the excerpted
graphics in Paragraphs 150
and 151, should be sealed
because they discuss the
results of a highly
confidential product
comparison analysis
conducted by Arista.
Paragraph 152 and the
excerpted images within it
(which extend to the top of
page 80) should be sealed
because they reveal the
results of a highly
confidential competitive
analysis performed by Arista
regarding the preferences of
its customers, and also
discuss particular tracking
documents that are part of
Arista’s internal development
and design process.

27
28

The images shown in
7

1
2
3
4
5
6

Paragraphs 170 and 171
should be sealed because they
reveal confidential
information about the
development of certain
accused features of Arista’s
products (image in Paragraph
170, at the top of page 89),
and about Arista’s source
code (image in Paragraph
171, at the top of page 90).

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The excerpted deposition
testimony of Adam Sweeney
in Paragraph 195 and 196
(which extends from the
bottom of page 103 to the top
of page 104) should be sealed
because it discusses the nonpublic details of a particular
technical support request for
an Arista product, and
Arista’s internal process for
resolving the request.
The highlighted portion of
Paragraph 203 should be
sealed because it discusses
highly confidential
information and cites from an
internal, non-public Arista
document regarding the
development of a particular
aspect of the Arista product.
The highlighted portions of
Paragraphs 219 and 220, and
the excerpted images within
Paragraph 219 (which extend
from pages 113 to 115)
should be sealed because they
reveal (and excerpt) highly
confidential sales materials
created by Arista for a nonpublic presentation to a
particular prospective
customer, and therefore
reveal Arista’s internal
8

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

competitive sales strategies.
The following portions of
Paragraph 237 should be
sealed: (1) The excerpted
deposition testimony of
Arista employee Kenneth
Duda from page 145, line 14
to page 146, line 20 of the
transcript excerpt. That
portion of the excerpted Duda
deposition transcript
discusses Arista’s internal
customer intelligence
regarding customer
preferences in particular
market segments, and the
benefits of certain
development approaches
taken by Arista vis-à-vis that
intelligence. (2) The entire
excerpted deposition
testimony of Arista employee
Anshul Sadana. The
excerpted Sadana deposition
transcript discusses Arista’s
internal customer intelligence
regarding customer
preferences, and the benefits
of certain development
approaches taken by Arista
vis-à-vis that intelligence.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

The following portions of
Paragraph 238 should be
sealed: The excerpted
deposition testimony of
Arista employee Kenneth
Duda from page 176, line 14
to page 177, line 8 of the
transcript should be sealed
because it discusses
confidential information
regarding networking
equipment used by Arista’s
customers.

27
28

The bullet points in
9

Paragraph 240 should be
sealed because they quote
from highly confidential
internal Arista development
documents that discuss the
strategic decisions underlying
the development and
architecture of Arista
products.

1
2
3
4
5
6

Paragraph 241 should be
sealed because it reveals
internal and highly sensitive
customer intelligence about
the usage of particular
features in Arista’s products
by its customers, which could
be used by competitors for
purposes of developing
features on their own
products.

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

The sentence in Paragraph
250 that starts with “For
example, ....” should be
sealed because it quote from
highly confidential internal
Arista development document
discussing the strategic
decisions underlying the
development and architecture
of Arista products.

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

Exhibit 2 to the Almeroth
Declaration

Footnote 106 on Page 60,
which reproduces testimony
from the Rule 30(b)(6)
deposition of Arista employee
Anshul Sadana, should be
sealed because it reveals
non-public and highly
confidential information
about the impact of specific
features in Arista’s products
on Arista’s sales cycles
The highlighted text in
Paragraph 138, sub-sections
10

GRANTED as to the specific
portions mentioned in
preceding column and
DENIED as to remainder.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

(a), (c), (d), (e), (g), (h), (i),
(j) are excerpts from highly
confidential internal Arista
documents and
communications that discuss
internal design and
development decisions and
strategic reasons regarding
specific aspects of Arista’s
products.
The quoted text pulls in
Paragraph 143 are excerpts
from highly confidential
internal Arista documents and
communications that discuss
internal design and
development decisions and
strategic reasons regarding
specific aspects of Arista’s
products. Arista does not
seek to seal the first sentence
of Paragraph 143, which
broadly characterizes the text
pulls.

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

Paragraph 144, including the
excerpted image, should be
sealed in its entirety because
it discusses the results of a
highly confidential product
comparison analysis
conducted by Arista
The quoted text pull in
Paragraph 146 is an excerpt
from a highly confidential
internal Arista document that
discusses internal design and
development decisions and
strategic reasons regarding
specific aspects of Arista’s
products. Given the
sensitivity of Arista’s
confidential product design
and development
decisionmaking processes,
that portion of Paragraph 146
11

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

should be sealed.
In Paragraph 147, the second
sentence (starting with “In
2010 …”) through to the
sentence that starts with
“Arista’s CEO …” should be
sealed because they discuss
and excerpt material from
internal Arista
communications that reveal
Arista’s strategic decisionmaking regarding customer
preferences/complaints and
the development of user
documentation.
The bullet points in
Paragraph 149 should be
sealed because they quote
directly from internal Arista
documents and
communications that reveal
customer intelligence
regarding customer
preferences, the benefits that
customers receive from
particular aspects of Arista’s
products, and Arista’s sales
and marketing strategies with
respect to those preferences
and benefits.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Paragraph 154 and footnote
168 should be sealed in their
entirety because they reveal
highly confidential
information regarding the
development and features of
future releases of Arista’s
products.
Paragraph 160 should be
sealed in its entirety because
it discusses the same highly
confidential comparative
study between Arista’s
products and competing
12

products that is discussed in
Paragraph 144 of this same
exhibit (which Arista also
seeks to seal), and Arista’s
conclusions and strategic use
of that internal research. It
also discloses Arista’s
sensitive competitive sales
strategies with respect to
communications to
prospective customers
regarding product
differentiation.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Exhibit 3 to the Almeroth
Declaration
Exhibit 1 to the Declaration
of Kevin Jeffay in Support of
Cisco’s Opposition to Arista’s
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

Paragraphs 164-166
contain confidential
information about the
technology and architecture
of Cisco’s products.
Includes source code.
Footnote 3 of this exhibit
should be sealed in its
entirety because it reveals
highly confidential
information, and includes
excerpts from the deposition
testimony of an Arista
engineer, regarding sensitive
and non-public aspects of the
source code underlying
Arista’s products.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Paragraph 80 of this exhibit
should be sealed in its
entirety because it reveals
highly confidential
information regarding nonpublic and sensitive source
code underlying Arista’s
products.
The excerpted deposition
testimony of Arista employee
Adam Sweeney in Paragraphs
126 and 127 should be
redacted because they discuss
in detail the internal operation
13

GRANTED
GRANTED as to the specific
portions mentioned in
preceding column and
DENIED as to remainder

of Arista’s products, nonpublic information regarding
the development of those
features, and the benefits of
those features.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

C.
ECF 378
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Defendant Arista Network,
Inc.’s Opposition to Cisco’s
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment (“Opposition”)
Declaration of John R. Black
Jr. in Support of Defendant
Arista Networks, Inc.’s
Opposition to Cisco’s Motion
for Summary Judgment and
Arista’s Summary Judgment
Motion (“Black Decl.”) Ex. 1
(“Black Opening Report”)

Description of Documents
Quotes from or cites below
exhibits

Contains Arista confidential
information at Paragraphs ¶¶
397, 519, 525, and 678(i).
Paragraph 397 discusses and
discloses internal, non-public
information regarding the
development and
development process of the
Arista EOS software,
including details regarding
how certain technologies
were integrated into Arista’s
products. Paragraphs 519,
525, and 678(i) discuss and
disclose non-public
information regarding Dr.
Black’s review of highly
confidential Arista source
code, and evidence relating to
such source code.
Contains direct quotes and
references to the transcript of
the deposition of Philip
Kasten as Juniper’s corporate
designee pursuant to a
subpoena served on Juniper
by Arista. The transcript
reflects substantive
discussion of the technical
underpinnings and
development of Juniper’s
14

Court’s Order
GRANTED to the extent it
quotes or cites information
that has been allowed to be
filed under seal and DENIED
as to remainder.
GRANTED as to Paragraphs
¶¶ 397, 519, 525, and 678(i);
portions quoting or
referencing deposition of
Philip Kasten; highlighted
portions of Paragraphs ¶¶
120, 123-125, 132, 161, 433,
438, 448-459, 461-471, 478482, 498, 500-502, 504, 508,
510, 514, 515, 570, 580, 636,
689-691, 696, 700 and
footnotes 32, 35, 40, and 128;
and DENIED as to
remainder.

highly proprietary software.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Black Decl. Ex. 38 (“Black
Rebuttal Report”)

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

Declaration of William M.
Seifert in Support of
Defendant Arista Networks,
Inc.’s Opposition to Cisco’s

Cisco supports the sealing of
the highlighted portions of
paragraphs 120, 123-125,
132, 161, 433, 438, 448-459,
461-471, 478-482, 498, 500502, 504, 508, 510, 514, 515,
570, 580, 636, 689-691, 696,
700 and footnotes 32, 35, 40,
and 128. These portions of
this exhibit contain Cisco’s
confidential source code,
discussions of related
confidential third-party
source code, as well as
confidential information
about Cisco’s licenses,
business development, and
competitive intelligence.
Contains Arista confidential
information at Paragraphs ¶¶
148, 155, 156, 160– 166, and
169–171. These paragraphs
discuss and disclose nonpublic information regarding
both Dr. Black’s and Dr.
Almeroth’s reviews of highly
confidential Arista source
code, and evidence relating to
such source code.
Cisco supports the sealing of
paragraphs 50-51, 55, 148,
155, 156, 159, 160, 165, and
170. These portions of this
exhibit contain Cisco’s
confidential source code,
discussions of related
confidential third-party
source code, as well as
confidential information
about Cisco’s business
development.
Contains Arista confidential
information at Paragraphs ¶¶
90 (including footnote 78), 96
(including charts on Pages 43
15

GRANTED as to Paragraphs
¶¶ 148, 155, 156, 160– 166,
and 169–171; and 50-51, 55,
148, 155, 156, 159, 160, 165,
and 170; and DENIED as to
remainder.

GRANTED as to Paragraphs
¶¶ 90 (including footnote 78),
96 (including charts on Pages
43 and 44), 97 (including

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Motion for Summary
Judgment (“Seifert Decl.”)
Ex. 1 (“Seifert Expert
Report”)

and 44), 97 (including
footnote 88), 98 (including
footnotes 89–91), 99
(including footnote 92),
100(i), 100(ii) (including
footnote 94), 100(iv)
(including footnote 95),
100(v) (including footnote
97), 101, 103 (including
footnote 106), 108, and 109.
These excerpts from Mr.
Seifert’s report contain
Arista’s highly competitive
business information. They
cite and discuss customer
sales presentations, which
contain sensitive and nonpublic Arista sales and
marketing strategies. Others
discuss the results of product
testing and confidential
customer feedback, including
the identities of those
customers. In some cases, the
excerpts recite detailed
information about Arista’s
marketing responses to the
preferences of specific
segments of customers, along
with sales information, all of
which Arista protects as
highly confidential. These
excerpts also disclose
sensitive market data and
analysis used by Arista for
competitive purposes.
Contains direct quotes and
references to the transcript of
the deposition of Philip
Kasten as Juniper’s corporate
designee pursuant to a
subpoena served on Juniper
by Arista. The transcript
reflects substantive
discussion of the technical
underpinnings and
development of Juniper’s
16

footnote 88), 98 (including
footnotes 89–91), 99
(including footnote 92),
100(i), 100(ii) (including
footnote 94), 100(iv)
(including footnote 95),
100(v) (including footnote
97), 101, 103 (including
footnote 106), 108, and 109,
and portions quoting or
referencing deposition of
Philip Kasten, and DENIED
as to remainder.

1
2
3
4
5

Declaration of Cate M. Elsten
in Support of Defendant
Arista Networks, Inc.’s
Opposition to Cisco’s Motion
for Summary Judgment
(“Elsten Decl.”) Ex. 1
(“Elsten June 3 Report”)

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Elsten Decl. Ex. 2 (“Elsten
Rebuttal Report”)

highly proprietary software.
Contains Arista confidential
information on Pages 9, 17,
22–23, as shown in the
highlighted copy of the
Expert Report. Those pages
of Ms. Elsten’s Expert Report
on Market Harm contain nonpublic and sensitive business,
product pricing, and actual
and prospective customer
information, including
information about customer
requirements and preferences
regarding purchasing

GRANTED as to Pages 9, 17,
22–23; Page 7, the top of
page 9, page 14, page 15,
page 21, the top 2 lines and
bottom 7 lines of page 22,
pages 23-28, the top of page
32, and page 33; and
DENIED as to remainder.

Cisco supports the sealing of
the highlighted portions of
the following: page 7, the top
of page 9, page 14, page 15,
page 21, the top 2 lines and
bottom 7 lines of page 22,
pages 23-28, the top of page
32, and page 33. These
portions of this exhibit
contain confidential and
sensitive information about
Cisco’s business development
and technology as well as
Cisco’s competitive
strategies.
Ms. Elsten’s Rebuttal Report GRANTED
contains non-public and
sensitive business, product
pricing, and customer
information, as well as sales
and revenue data, and
information about actual and
prospective customer
requirements and preferences
regarding purchasing, all of
which Arista maintains as
highly confidential. This
exhibit also contains
confidential and sensitive
business and pricing
information, confidential
information about actual and
17

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Declaration of Ryan Wong in
Support of Defendant Arista
Networks, Inc.’s Opposition
to Cisco’s Motion for
Summary Judgment (“Wong
Decl.” or “Wong
Declaration”) Ex. 1 (Excerpts
from Lougheed Deposition
Transcript, 11/20/2015)
Wong Decl. Ex. 2 (Excerpts
from Satz Deposition
Transcript)
Wong Decl. Ex. 4 (Excerpts
from Li Deposition
Transcript)

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Wong Decl. Ex. 5 (Excerpts
from Dell Corporate
Deposition Transcript)
Wong Decl. Ex. 7 (Cisco
email dated 8/2/2013)
Wong Decl. Ex. 8 (Cisco
email dated 10/6/2005)

21
22

Wong Decl. Ex. 9
(compilation of documents)

23
24
25
26

Wong Decl. Ex. 11 (Excerpts
from Lang Deposition
Transcript

27
28

Wong Decl. Ex. 13 (Arista

prospective customers, as
well as confidential data
related to Cisco’s sales and
revenue.
Cisco supports the sealing of
55:2-56:18, 95:9-99:14;
178:11-13. These portions of
this exhibit contain details
regarding the witness’s
personal work history,
confidential Cisco licensing
information and confidential
source code.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
Cisco supports the sealing of
9:21-23; 152:8-20; 227:1922; 236:22-24. These portions
of this exhibit contain details
regarding the witness’s home
address, a detailed discussion
of confidential technical
information about Cisco’s
products, as well as
confidential business
information.
No supporting declaration
filed.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
Exhibits 9D, 9E, and 9F
contains confidential
information about Cisco
competitive strategies and
interactions with customers
Cisco supports the sealing of
pp. 254-255 of this exhibit.
This portions of the exhibit
contains details regarding
confidential business
information.
A confidential, non-public
18

GRANTED as to 55:2-56:18,
95:9-99:14; 178:11-13 and
DENIED as to remainder.

DENIED

GRANTED as to 9:21-23;
152:8-20; 227:19- 22;
236:22-24 and DENIED as to
remainder.

DENIED

DENIED

DENIED

GRANTED as to exhibits
9D, 9E, and 9F, and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED as to pages 254255 and DENIED as to
remainder.

GRANTED

1

internal presentation)

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Wong Decl. Ex. 14 (Arista
internal presentation)

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16

Wong Decl. Ex. 15
(compilation of deposition
transcript excerpts and
documents)

17
18
19
20

Wong Decl. Ex. 16 (Cisco
email dated 1/20/2010)

21
22
23

Wong Decl. Ex. 17 (Excerpts
from Remaker Deposition
Transcript, 3/31/2016)

24
25
26
27
28

Wong Decl. Ex. 18
(Excerpts from Lougheed
Deposition Transcript,

Arista presentation (with
speaker notes included) that
discloses sensitive strategic
information about Arista’s
business operations, including
target customers and markets,
product lineups, and a
breakdown of compensation
structures for engineers
(including benefits, and other
financial data relating to
compensation)
A confidential, non-public
Arista presentation that
discloses sensitive strategic
information about Arista’s
business operations, including
target customers and markets,
and financial information
(including revenue and
growth projections) regarding
those particular customers
and markets
Cisco supports the sealing of
pages 32-67 of part 1 of this
exhibit and pages 1-28, and
33-34 of part 2 of this exhibit.
Pages 32-67 of part 1 of this
exhibit contain confidential
information about Cisco’s
products, competitive
strategies and product testing.
This exhibit contains
confidential information
about Cisco competitive
strategies and interactions
with customers.
Cisco supports the sealing of
27:1-29:25; 38:2-45:25; 50:257:25; 62:1-73:24; 82:185:19. These portions of this
exhibit contain confidential
details regarding Cisco’s
product development and
source code
Cisco supports the sealing of
259:15-260:22; 261:18-22;
267:4-295:1; 296:23-298:16,
19

GRANTED

GRANTED as to pages 3267 of part 1 of this exhibit
and pages 1-28, and 33-34 of
part 2 of this exhibit and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED

GRANTED as to 27:1-29:25;
38:2-45:25; 50:2-57:25; 62:173:24; 82:1-85:19 and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED as to 259:15260:22; 261:18-22; 267:4295:1; 296:23-298:16,

1

4/4/2016)

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Wong Decl. Ex. 19 (Cisco
email dated 7/26/2006)
Wong Decl. Ex. 20 (Excerpts
from Liu Deposition
Transcript)

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Wong Decl. Ex. 21
(compilation of deposition
transcript excerpts)

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Wong Decl. Ex. 22 (Excerpts
from Kavasseri Deposition
Transcript)

23

346:18-374:18; 379:2-25.
These portions of this exhibit
contain details regarding the
witness’s personal work
history, confidential Cisco
licensing information and
confidential source code.
This exhibit contains
confidential details regarding
Cisco’s product development.
Cisco supports the sealing of
8:11-19. This portion of the
exhibit contains the witness’s
home address and personal
email addresses and should
be sealed to protect the
witness’s privacy.
Cisco supports the sealing of
144:19-149:24 and 154:2157:25 of the Li excerpt,
starting on page 7 of the asfiled pdf; 123:24-125:15 of
the Lougheed excerpt,
starting an page 13 of the asfiled pdf; 231:21-262:25:25
of the Lougheed excerpt,
starting on page 21 of the asfiled pdf; and 363:1-366:25
of the Lougheed excerpt,
starting on page 26 of the asfiled pdf. The specified
portion of this exhibit
discusses confidential source
code and the confidential
development of products.
Cisco supports the sealing of
this exhibit as it contains
confidential details regarding
Cisco’s product development
and source code.

346:18-374:18; 379:2-25, and
DENIED as to remainder.

The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
This exhibit contains a
detailed discussion of
confidential technical
information about Cisco’s
20

DENIED

GRANTED

GRANTED as to 8:11-19 and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED as to 144:19149:24 and 154:2-157:25 of
the Li excerpt, starting on
page 7 of the as-filed pdf;
123:24-125:15 of the
Lougheed excerpt, starting an
page 13 of the as-filed pdf;
231:21-262:25:25 of the
Lougheed excerpt, starting on
page 21 of the as- filed pdf;
and 363:1-366:25 of the
Lougheed excerpt, starting on
page 26 of the as-filed pdf;
and DENIED as to
remainder.

GRANTED

24
25
26
27
28

Wong Decl. Ex. 24 (Excerpts
from Kathail Deposition
Transcript)
Wong Decl. Ex. 25 (Cisco
presentation dated
10/21/2004)

GRANTED

1
2
3

Wong Decl. Ex. 26 (Cisco
email dated 1/12/1999)

4
5
6
7

Wong Decl. Ex. 27 (Cisco
internal document)

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Wong Decl. Ex. 28 (Cisco
email dated 10/22/1997)
Wong Decl. Ex. 29 (Excerpts
from Patil Deposition
Transcript)

14
15
16
17

Wong Decl. Ex. 30 (Excerpts
from Sweeney Deposition
Transcript)

18
19
20
21
22

Wong Decl. Ex. 31 (Cisco
internal document)

23
24
25
26
27
28

Wong Decl. Ex. 32 (Cisco
email dated 1/12/1999)

products, as well as
confidential business
information.
This exhibit contains a
detailed discussion of
confidential technical
information about Cisco’s
products, as well as
confidential business
information.
This exhibit contains a
detailed discussion of
confidential technical
information about Cisco’s
products, as well as
confidential business
information.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
Cisco supports the sealing of
8:13-9:1. This portion of the
exhibit contains the witness’s
home address and should be
sealed to protect the witness’s
privacy.
Excerpts discuss and disclose
internal, non-public
information regarding the
development and
development process of the
Arista EOS software,
including details regarding
how certain technologies
were integrated into Arista’s
products.
This exhibit contains a
detailed discussion of
confidential technical
information about Cisco’s
products, as well as
confidential business
information.
This exhibit contains a
detailed discussion of
confidential technical
information about Cisco’s
products, as well as
21

GRANTED

GRANTED

DENIED

GRANTED as to 8:13-9:1
and DENIED as to
remainder.

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

1
2
3

Wong Decl. Ex. 33 (Excerpts
from Remaker Deposition
Transcript, 3/30/2016)

4
5
6

Wong Decl. Ex. 34 (Excerpts
from Redlefsen Deposition
Transcript)

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Wong Decl. Ex. 36 (Excerpts
from Black Deposition
Transcript (Rough))

12
13
14
15
16
17

Wong Decl. Ex. 37 (Excerpts
from the Opening Expert
Report of Kevin Almeroth,
dated June 3, 2016)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Wong Decl. Ex. 38 (Excerpts
from Juniper Networks
Corporate Deposition of
Philip Kasten)
Wong Decl. Ex. 41 (Excerpts
from HewlettPackard
Enterprise Corporate
Deposition of Balaji
Venkatraman)
Wong Decl. Ex. 42 (Brocade
FastIron Manual)
Wong Decl. Ex. 43 (Brocade
FAQ document)

confidential business
information.
Cisco supports the sealing of
8:17-18. This portion of the
exhibit contains the witness’s
home address and should be
sealed to protect the witness’s
privacy.
The excerpts from Mr.
Redlefsen’s deposition
transcript discuss and disclose
internal, non-public
information regarding the
development and
development process of the
Arista EOS software.
The excerpts from Dr.
Black’s deposition transcript
discuss and disclose nonpublic information regarding
his review of highly
confidential Arista and Cisco
source code and discuss his
analysis of their differences
based on that analysis.
Cisco supports the sealing the
first two sentences of
paragraph 261. This portion
of the exhibit contains
information about Cisco’s
source code and related thirdparty source code, which
relates to a confidential
license.
The transcript reflects
substantive discussion of the
technical underpinnings and
development of Juniper’s
highly proprietary software.
No supporting declaration
filed.

No supporting declaration
filed.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
22

GRANTED as to 8:17-18 and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED as to first two
sentences of paragraph 261
and DENIED as to
remainder.

GRANTED

DENIED

DENIED
DENIED

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

these exhibits.
Wong Decl. Ex. 44 (Cisco
The designating party, Cisco,
presentation dated June 1,
does not seek the sealing of
2007)
these exhibits.
Wong Decl. Ex. 45 (Cisco
This exhibit contains
manual)
confidential information
about Cisco’s competitive
strategies and would cause
substantial harm to Cisco if
disclosed publicly.
Wong Decl. Ex. 46 (Cisco
The designating party, Cisco,
NextHop document)
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
Wong Decl. Ex. 47 (Cisco HP The designating party, Cisco,
document)
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
Wong Decl. Ex. 48 (Excerpts Cisco seeks to seal 14:11-13
from Malik Deposition
This portion of the exhibit
Transcript)
contains the personal address
of the witness which should
be sealed to protect the
witness’s privacy.
Wong Decl. Ex. 49 (Cisco
The designating party, Cisco,
presentation)
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
Wong Decl. Ex. 50 (Cisco
The designating party, Cisco,
metadata for the document
does not seek the sealing of
immediately above)
these exhibits.
Wong Decl. Ex. 51 (Excerpts Cisco supports the sealing of
from Hartingh Deposition
30:1-33:25 and 178:1- 180:9.
Transcript)
These portions of this exhibit
contain confidential details
regarding Cisco’s competitive
strategies and competitive
intelligence practices.
Wong Decl. Ex. 52 (Excerpts Cisco supports the sealing of
from Pletcher Deposition
99:4-105:25. These portions
Transcript)
of this exhibit contain
confidential details regarding
Cisco’s competitive strategies
and competitive intelligence
practices.
Wong Decl. Ex. 53 (Cisco
This exhibit contains
email dated 7/11/2002)
confidential information
about Cisco’s product
architecture and competitive
strategies.
Wong Decl. Ex. 54 (Cisco
The designating party, Cisco,
23

DENIED

GRANTED

DENIED

DENIED

GRANTED as to 14:11-13
and DENIED as to
remainder.

DENIED

DENIED

GRANTED as to 30:1-33:25
and 178:1- 180:9 and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED as to 99:4105:25 and DENIED as to
remainder.

GRANTED

DENIED

1
2

email dated 4/15/2008)
Wong Decl. Ex. 55 (Cisco
email dated 7/8/2005)

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Wong Decl. Ex. 56 (Cisco
product requirements
document)
Wong Decl. Ex. 57 (Cisco
email dated 4/15/2008)
Wong Decl. Ex. 58 (Cisco
document dated 12/7/2011)
Wong Decl. Ex. 59 (Cisco
document dated 10/24/2001)

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Wong Decl. Ex. 60 (Cisco
presentation dated 6/20/2012)
Wong Decl. Ex. 61 (Cisco
letter to Stanford dated
12/18/2002)
Wong Decl. Ex. 62
(compilation of deposition
transcript excerpts)

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Wong Decl. Ex. 63
(compilation of deposition
transcript excerpts)

25
26
27
28

Wong Decl. Ex. 64

does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
This exhibit contains
confidential information
about Cisco’s product
development and customer
interactions.
This exhibit contains
confidential details regarding
Cisco’s product development.
This of this exhibit contains
confidential details regarding
Cisco’s product development.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
This exhibit contains
confidential information
about Cisco’s market share
and competitive strategies.
The designating party, Cisco,
does not seek the sealing of
these exhibits.
This exhibit contains
confidential information
about a license.
Cisco supports the sealing of
55:2-56:18 and 359:4-396:25
of the Lougheed excerpt, and
9:21-23 of the Li excerpt. The
specified portion of the
Lougheed excerpt contains a
discussion of source code.
The specified portion of the
Li excerpt contains the
witness’s home address and
should be sealed to protect
the privacy of the witness.
Cisco supports the sealing of
9:21-23 of the Li excerpt and
8:11-19 of the Liu excerpt.
These excerpts contain the
home address and personal
email addresses of the
witnesses and should be
sealed to protect the privacy
of the witnesses.
No supporting declaration
24

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

DENIED

GRANTED

DENIED

GRANTED

GRANTED as to 55:2-56:18
and 359:4-396:25 of the
Lougheed excerpt, and 9:2123 of the Li excerpt, and
DENIED as to remainder.

GRANTED as to 9:21-23 of
the Li excerpt and 8:11-19 of
the Liu excerpt, and DENIED
as to remainder.

DENIED

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

(compilation of documents)
D.
ECF 393
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Arista’s Reply in Support of
Arista’s Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment
E.
ECF 396
Identification of Documents
to be Sealed
Cisco’s Reply in Support
of its Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14

Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment
Exhibit 3 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

25
26
27
28

Exhibit 4 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its

filed.
Description of Documents
No supporting declaration
filed.

Description of Documents

Court’s Order
DENIED

Court’s Order

Cisco’s reply brief at page 4:4– GRANTED as to 4:4-10 and
10 and page 11:23–12:3 quotes 11:23-12:3; and 10:25-11:4
from or describes Exhibit 8
and DENIED as to remainder.
below.
Cisco’s reply brief at page
10:25–11:4 quotes from or
paraphrases Exhibit 1 below.
The excerpts from Mr.
Sweeney’s deposition
transcript discuss and disclose
internal, non-public
information regarding the
development and development
process of the Arista EOS
software, including details
regarding how certain
technologies were integrated
into Arista’s products.
The charts contained in Exhibit
2 list the non-public names of
Arista engineers involved in
product development and the
non-public development
history of Arista’s software.
Contains competitively
sensitive discussions
concerning Arista’s internal
product development process,
including the tools Arista uses
to develop its products,
Arista’s sales strategies, and
Arista’s analyses of its
competitors.
Contains competitively
sensitive discussions
concerning Arista’s internal
25

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

1

Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Exhibit 5 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Exhibit 6 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

13
14
15
16
17
18

Exhibit 7 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Exhibit 8 to the Declaration of
John M. Neukom in Support of
Cisco’s Reply in Support of its
Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment

product development process,
the inner workings of its
products and their
technological capabilities,
Arista’s strategies for winning
customers, opinions
concerning customer demands,
and Arista’s analyses of its
competitors.
Contains competitively
sensitive discussions
concerning Arista’s
competitive analyses and
testing, customer demands,
sales strategies, and the inner
workings of Arista products
Contains competitively
sensitive discussion of Arista’s
internal deliberations
concerning the design of its
software, Arista’s software and
source code design policies,
strategies for keeping and
winning customers, and
internal discussions concerning
and analyzing sales.
Contains competitively
sensitive discussion of Arista’s
internal deliberations
concerning the design of its
software, opinions concerning
customer demand and sales
strategies, and the inner
workings and technological
capabilities of Arista’s
products.
Contains the entirety of the
CONFIDENTIAL VERSION
of the International Trade
Commission’s Opinion in In
the Matter of Certain Network
Devices, Related Software, and
Components Thereof (I),
Investigation No. 337-TA-944.
It is replete with competitively
sensitive confidential business
information related to, among
other things, the operation of
26

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

GRANTED

Arista’s products that was
provided to the U.S.
International Trade
Commission under an
Administrative Protective
Order.

1
2
3
4
5
6

III.

ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, the sealing motions at ECF 331, 371, 378, 393, 396 are

7
GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(2), for any request
8
that has been denied because the party designating a document as confidential or subject to a
9
protective order has not provided sufficient reasons to seal, the submitting party must file the
10
unredacted (or lesser redacted) documents into the public record no earlier than 4 days and no later
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

than 10 days form the filing of this order.
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
Dated: August 24, 2016
14
15

______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

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