Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc.

Filing 283

ORDER GRANTING #282 BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, LLC'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 8/4/2017. (patentlcsjS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2017)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

FINJAN, INC.,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, LLC,
Defendant.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 15-cv-03295-BLF
ORDER GRANTING BLUE COAT
SYSTEMS, LLC'S ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL
[Re: ECF 282]

12
Before the Court is Defendant Blue Coat Systems LLC’s (“Blue Coat”) administrative

13
14

motion to file under seal portions of the Court’s Order Regarding Summary Judgment (ECF 276)

15

and Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Blue Coat Systems, LLC’s Motion to Strike

16

Expert Reports (ECF 277). ECF 282. For the reasons set forth below, Blue Coat’s motion is

17

GRANTED.

18
19

I.

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

20

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

21

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

22

U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are

23

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

24

“compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092,

25

1101-02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed

26

upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097. In addition, sealing motions filed in this

27

district must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b).

28

A party moving to seal a document in whole or in part must file a declaration establishing that the

1

identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A). “Reference to a stipulation or

2

protective order that allows a party to designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient

3

to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are sealable.” Id.

4
5

II.

DISCUSSION
The Court has reviewed Blue Coat’s sealing motion and the declaration submitted in

support thereof. According to Blue Coat, the portions of the Court’s orders for which sealing is

7

requested contain information relating to details of the internal operation of Blue Coat’s products,

8

including backend systems related to those products, as well as Blue Coat’s confidential business

9

operations. Declaration of Robin L. Brewer in Support of Administrative Motion to File Under

10

Seal, ECF 282-1 ¶¶ 5-14. The Court finds that Blue Coat has articulated compelling reasons and

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

6

good cause for sealing. The proposed redactions are also narrowly tailored. Accordingly, the

12

Court GRANTS Blue Coat’s motion to seal.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16
17

Dated: August 4, 2017
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2