Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc.

Filing 661

ORDER granting 618 , 626 , 637 , 653 Administrative Motions to File Under Seal. Signed by Judge Susan van Keulen on 6/11/2020. (svklc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/11/2020)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 FINJAN, INC., Plaintiff, 8 9 ORDER ON MOTIONS TO SEAL v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 618, 626, 637, 653 10 CISCO SYSTEMS INC., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK) Defendant. 12 The Administrative Motions to File Documents Under Seal currently before the Court 13 include motions filed by Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (Dkt. 618, 626, and 653) and Defendant Cisco 14 Systems Inc. (Dkt. 637) (collectively, the “Motions”) seeking to seal certain materials submitted to 15 the Court in connection with (1) Finjan’s Motion for Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration 16 of the Court’s Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Report, 17 and (2) Finjan’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike 18 Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports. 19 Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, 20 including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 21 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 22 (1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of 23 access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 24 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to 25 court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party 26 seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the 27 underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For 28 Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to 1 motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower 2 “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party 3 moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local 4 Rule 79-5. 5 Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information the parties seek to seal 6 was submitted to the Court in connection with a discovery-related motion, rather than a motion 7 that concerns the merits of the case. Having considered the Motions and supporting declarations, 8 as well as the Declarations of Nicole Grigg (Dkt. 631, 632, 637-1, and 655) in support thereof, and 9 the pleadings on file, and good cause appearing, the Motions are hereby GRANTED as follows: 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Dkt. 618: Finjan’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Portion(s) to Seal Finjan Inc.’s Motion for GRANTED as to Leave to File Motion for Highlighted portions Reconsideration at i:15, 18; 2:15, 28; 3:1, 13-14, 26; 4:1822, 26; 5:23; 6:2, 10, 16, 18; 7:3, 4, 6, 914; 8:3, 6, 8-24, 27; 9:12-13, 19, 25; 10:13-16, 23; and 11:14, 17, 23, 26. Exhibit 1 to the Excerpt from the Expert Entirety Declaration of Report of Dr. Atul Aamir A. Kazi in Prakash Regarding NonSupport of Finjan Infringement of U.S. Inc.’s Motion for Patent No. 7,647,633, Leave to File dated August 14, 2019. Motion for Reconsideration Ex. No. Document Reason(s) for Sealing Portions of this document contain confidential technical information and source code related to the accused Cisco products. Public disclosure of this information would cause harm to Cisco. Redactions are narrowly tailored. See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 631) at ¶ 2. This document contains confidential technical information and source code related to the accused Cisco products. Public disclosure of this information would cause harm to Cisco. See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 631) at ¶ 2. 24 25 Dkt. 626: Finjan’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal 26 Ex. No. 27 Dkt. 623 28 Portion(s) to Reason(s) for Sealing Seal Finjan Inc.’s Motion for Highlighted portions Portions of this document contain Reconsideration at i:15, 17-18; 2:18; confidential technical information 3:4-5, 17-18; 4:4; and source code related to the Document 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4:23-27; 5:3, 28; 6:7, accused Cisco products. Public 15, 21, 23; 7:8, 9, 11, disclosure of this information 14-19; 8:8, 11, 13, would cause harm to Cisco. 14-28; 9:1, 4, 17, 18, Redactions are narrowly tailored. 24; 10:2, 18-21, 28; See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 632) at ¶ 2. 11:19, 22; and 12:1, 4. Exhibit 1 to the Excerpt from the Expert Entirety This document contains Declaration of Report of Dr. Atul confidential technical information Aamir A. Kazi in Prakash Regarding Nonand source code related to the Support of Finjan Infringement of U.S. accused Cisco products. Public Inc.’s Motion for Patent No. 7,647,633, disclosure of this information Reconsideration dated August 14, 2019. would cause harm to Cisco. See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 632) at ¶ 2. 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Dkt. 637: Cisco’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Ex. No. 12 Document Cisco’s Brief in Opposition to Finjan Inc.’s Motion for Reconsideration 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Exhibit 1 to the Grigg Declaration of in Support of Cisco’s Brief in Excerpt from the Expert Report of Dr. Atul Prakash Regarding NonInfringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,647,633, Portion(s) to Seal Reason(s) for Sealing Table of Contents, Portions of this document contain lines 10-11; page 2, confidential technical information and source code related to the lines 13-15, 21; accused Cisco products. Public page 6, line 20; disclosure of this information page 7, lines 3, would cause harm to Cisco. Redactions are narrowly tailored. 10, 12-13, 22; page 8, lines 12- See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 637-1) at ¶ 2. 13, 24; page 9, lines 2, 5, 16, page 10, lines 13, 15, 18-20; page 11, lines 18, 20-22; page 12, lines 21-22; page 13, lines 5, 12, 14, 21, 23, 27-18; page 14, lines 3, 9, 11, 13, 15 Entire Document This document contains confidential technical information and source code related to the accused Cisco products. Public disclosure of this information 3 1 2 Opposition to dated August 14, 2019. Finjan Inc.’s Motion for Reconsideration would cause harm to Cisco. See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 637-1) at ¶ 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 Dkt. 653: Finjan’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Ex. No. Document Portion(s) to Seal Reason(s) for Sealing Finjan Inc.’s Reply In Highlighted portions Portions of this document Support Of Its Motion at: 3:4,8; 4:3-28; contain confidential For Reconsideration of 5:21-22; 6:7, 10, 14, technical information and the Court’s Order on 20-21, 24-25; 7:13source code related to the Cisco’s Motion to Strike 14, 18-21, 25, 28; 8:3, accused Cisco products. Portions of Finjan’s 6-11, 14-15, 21; Public disclosure of this Amended Expert 10:15, 17, 19, 21; information would cause Reports (Dkt. No. 582) 11:4, 7, 12, 14, 16, harm to Cisco. 24; and 12:5-6. Redactions are narrowly tailored. See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 655) at ¶ 2. Exhibit 2 to the Excerpt from the August Entirety This document contains Declaration of 27, 2019, Deposition of confidential technical Aamir A. Kazi Patrick McDaniel information and source in Support of code related to the Finjan Inc.’s accused Cisco products. Reply In Public disclosure of this Support of Its information would cause Motion for harm to Cisco. See Grigg Reconsideration Decl. (Dkt. 655) at ¶ 2. of the Court’s Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 582) Exhibit 3 to the Excerpt from the April Entirety This document contains Declaration of 17, 2019, Deposition of confidential technical Aamir A. Kazi Donald Owens information and source in Support of code related to the Finjan Inc.’s accused Cisco products. Reply In Public disclosure of this Support of Its information would cause Motion for harm to Cisco. See Grigg Reconsideration Decl. (Dkt. 655) at ¶ 2. of the Court’s Order on 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports (Dkt. No. 582) SO ORDERED. Dated: June 11, 2020 7 8 SUSAN VAN KEULEN United States Magistrate Judge 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 5

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?