VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation
Filing
637
ORDER GRANTING 579 , 591 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 9/7/2023. (blflc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/7/2023) (blflc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/7/2023)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
SAN JOSE DIVISION
6
7
VLSI TECHNOLOGY LLC,
Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No. 17-cv-05671-BLF
10
INTEL CORPORATION,
11
Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO
SEAL
[Re: ECF Nos. 579, 591]
12
13
Before the Court are 1) Intel Corporation’s (“Intel”) Administrative Motion to File Under
14
Seal Portions of Its Omnibus Motion for Summary Judgment and Exhibits 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15-17,
15
19, 20, 22-24, and 40-45 Thereto, ECF No. 579 (“Motion I”); and 2) Intel’s Administrative
16
Motion to File Under Seal Portions of its Reply in Support of Omnibus Daubert Motion to
17
Exclude and/or Strike, ECF No. 591 (“Motion II”). For the reasons discussed below, Intel’s
18
motions filed at ECF No. 579 and ECF No. 591 are GRANTED.
19
20
I.
LEGAL STANDARD
“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records
21
and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cty. Of
22
Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435
23
U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong
24
presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto.
25
Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to
26
motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden
27
of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of
28
access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d
United States District Court
Northern District of California
1
1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79.
2
Records attached to motions that are “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits
3
of a case,” however, are not subject to the strong presumption of access. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809
4
F.3d at 1099; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (“[T]he public has less of a need for access to
5
court records attached only to non-dispositive motions because those documents are often
6
unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action.”). Parties moving to seal
7
the documents attached to such motions must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule
8
26(c). Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted). This standard
9
requires a “particularized showing,” id., that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the
10
information is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206,
11
1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). “Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated
12
by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int'l Ins.
13
Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992).
14
II.
DISCUSSION
The documents at issue in Intel’s motions to seal are associated with its summary judgment
15
16
and Daubert motions. These opinions concern infringement and invalidity of the patents at issue
17
in the case, available damages for the alleged infringement, and efforts to strike or exclude expert
18
opinions. These issues are “more than tangentially related to the merits of [the] case” and
19
therefore the parties must provide “compelling reasons” for maintaining the documents under seal.
20
See Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1101; see also Finjan, Inc. v. Juniper Network, Inc., No. C
21
17-5659 WHA, 2021 WL 1091512, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2021).
22
23
A.
Motion I (ECF No. 579)
Intel seeks to seal selected excerpts from its Motion for Summary Judgment and several of
24
the exhibits. Intel argues that compelling reasons exist to seal the material it seeks to seal
25
“because maintaining the confidentiality of the technical information regarding Intel’s product
26
design and operation, including proposed designs, and manufacturing processes is critical to
27
Intel’s business.” ECF No. 579. Intel further explains that “[k]nowledge of this information by
28
third parties would put Intel at a competitive disadvantage in future product development and in its
2
United States District Court
Northern District of California
1
business dealings as its competitors could incorporate that information into their own development
2
strategies and products to gain an unfair advantage over Intel in the market.” Id. Intel bolsters
3
these arguments by providing additional details in the declaration of Mark Selwyn. See Selwyn
4
Decl. ¶ 9 (ECF No. 579-1).
5
The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to seal the highlighted portions of the
6
document. See Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., No. 13-CV-05808-HSG, 2016 WL 7911651, at *1
7
(N.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2016) (finding “technical operation of [defendant's] products” sealable under
8
“compelling reasons” standard); Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., No. 17-CV-04810-HSG,
9
2020 WL 2838812, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020) (noting that courts have found “confidential
10
business information” in the form of “business strategies” sealable under the compelling reasons
11
standard.). The Court also finds that the request is narrowly tailored.
The Court’s ruling is summarized below:
12
13
ECF No.
Document
Intel’s Summary
Judgment Motion
Portion(s) to Seal
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 1
Excerpt of the Expert
Report of Dr. Thomas
M. Conte, dated April
20, 2023
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 2
Excerpt of the transcript Green-boxed
of Dr. Thomas Conte’s portions
July 11, 2023 deposition
Ex. 8
Excerpt of the transcript
of Arthur Leonard
Brown III’s February
15, 2023 deposition
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 9
Excerpt of the transcript
of Russell Fenger’s
Green-boxed
portions
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Ruling
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl.
¶¶ 11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl.
¶¶ 11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl.
¶¶ 11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
February 17, 2023
deposition
1
2
3
Ex. 10
Excerpt of the transcript
of Tristan Brown’s
March 31, 2023
deposition
Ex. 15
Excerpt of the
Green-boxed
Supplemented Report of portions
Dr. William Henry
Mangione-Smith, dated
May 16, 2023
Ex. 16
Excerpt of William
Mangione-Smith’s July
14, 2023 deposition
Ex. 17
Excerpt of the Reply
Green-boxed
Report of Dr. William
portions
Henry Mangione-Smith,
dated June 22, 2023
Ex. 19
Excerpt of the Reply
Expert Report of Dr.
Thomas M. Conte
Regarding Infringement
of the ’836 and ’806
Patents, dated June 22,
2023.
Excerpt of the Rebuttal
Expert Report of Alyssa
B. Apsel, Ph.D.,
Regarding
Noninfringement of
U.S. Patent Nos.
7,675,806 and
8,004,922, dated June 1,
2023
Excerpt of the Expert
Report of Dean P.
Neikirk, dated April 20,
2023
4
5
Green-boxed
portions
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
Green-boxed
portions
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Ex. 20
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ex. 22
Green-boxed
portions
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Green-boxed
portions
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Green-boxed
portions
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
4
1
2
Ex. 23
Excerpt of the transcript Green-boxed
of Dean P. Neikirk’s
portions
July 21, 2023 deposition
Ex. 24
Confidential Settlement
and Patent License
Agreement between
Finjan Software, Inc.
and Finjan, Inc. on their
own behalf and on
behalf of their
respective Affiliates
and Intel Corporation,
dated November 20,
2012
Excerpt of the transcript
of Gerhard Schrom’s
February 10, 2023
deposition
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 41
Excerpt of the transcript
of Steve Gunther’s
February 2, 2023
deposition
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 42
Excerpt of the transcript
of Wei-Lun Jen’s
August 24, 2022
deposition
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 43
Excerpt of the transcript
of Chris Baldwin’s
January 27, 2023
deposition
Green-boxed
portions
Ex. 44
Excerpt of the transcript
of Doug B. Ingerly’s
February 2, 2023
deposition
Green-boxed
portions
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
Ex. 40
13
Green-boxed
portions
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
licensing information that the Court
has previously sealed. Selwyn
Decl. ¶¶ 14-15; Dkt. 339.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
1
Ex. 45
Excerpt of the transcript
of George Shchupak’s
March 29, 2023
deposition
B.
Motion II (ECF No. 591)
2
3
Green-boxed
portions
4
5
United States District Court
Northern District of California
6
11-12.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
technical information regarding the
design and operation of the
accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶
11-12.
Intel seeks to seal selected excerpts from its Reply in Support of Omnibus Daubert Motion
7
to Exclude and/or Strike and several of the exhibits. Intel argues that compelling reasons exist to
8
seal the material it seeks to seal “because maintaining the confidentiality of the technical
9
information regarding Intel’s product design and operation, including proposed designs, and
10
manufacturing processes is critical to Intel’s business.” ECF No. 591. Intel further explains that
11
“[k]nowledge of this information by third parties would put Intel at a competitive disadvantage in
12
future product development and in its business dealings as its competitors could incorporate that
13
information into their own development strategies and products to gain an unfair advantage over
14
Intel in the market.” Id. Intel bolsters these arguments by providing additional details in the
15
declaration of Mark Selwyn. See Selwyn Decl. ¶ 11 (ECF No. 591-1).
16
The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to seal the highlighted portions of the
17
document. See Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., No. 13-CV-05808-HSG, 2016 WL 7911651, at *1
18
(N.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2016) (finding “technical operation of [defendant's] products” sealable under
19
“compelling reasons” standard); Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., No. 17-CV-04810-HSG,
20
2020 WL 2838812, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020) (noting that courts have found “confidential
21
business information” in the form of “business strategies” sealable under the compelling reasons
22
standard.). The Court also finds that the request is narrowly tailored.
The Court’s ruling is summarized below:
23
24
\\
25
\\
26
\\
27
\\
28
\\
6
1
ECF No.
2
3
Document
Intel’s Reply Brief In
Support of Its
Omnibus Daubert
Motion
4
5
Portion(s) to Seal
Green-boxed
portions in Section
III at 7:17-18, 20,
23-24 and 10:7-8,
9-10, 12
Green-boxed
portions in Section
IV at 14:1-2, 3, 6,
7, 15-16
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
Ex. 1
Excerpt of the
Rebuttal Expert
Report of Lauren
R. Kindler, dated June
1, 2023
Green boxed
portions
Ex. 3
Excerpt of a
presentation entitled
Voltage Dependent
SRAM Sleep (VDSS)
by Guru Shamanna, as
produced with Bates
numbers
93799DOC0091475
Page 2 of the
exhibit
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
III.
Ruling
Granted, as green-boxed portions in
Section III at 7:17-18, 20, 23-24 and
10:7-8, 9-10, 12 contain highly
confidential information regarding
Intel’s licenses, including payment
terms from Intel’s license
agreements, the scope of Intel’s
license agreements, and other
confidential licensing information.
Selwyn Decl. ¶ 16.
Furthermore, green-boxed portions in
Section IV at 14:1-2, 3, 6, 7, 15-16
contain highly confidential technical
information regarding design,
development, and operation of Intel’s
product features, including proposed
designs. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 13.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential
information regarding Intel’s
licenses, including payment terms
from Intel’s license agreements, the
scope of Intel’s license agreements,
and other confidential licensing
information. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 16.
Granted, as green-boxed portions
contain highly confidential technical
information regarding design,
development and operation of Intel’s
product features, including proposed
designs. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 13.
ORDER
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Intel’s Motions to Seal at ECF
No. 579 and ECF No. 591 are GRANTED.
25
26
27
28
Dated: September 7, 2023
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge
7
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?