The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois v. Micron Technology Inc

Filing 120

ORDER granting 117 Motion to Seal. Entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 8/23/16. (WG, ilcd)

E-FILED

Tuesday, 23 August, 2016 10:05:38 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
URBANA DIVISION
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 2:11-cv-02288-SLD-JEH

v.
MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
Defendant.
Order

Now before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Under Seal
Certain Documents in Support of its Third Amended Answer to the Board of
Trustees of the University of Illinois’ Amended Complaint (Doc. 117). The Motion
is fully briefed and for the reasons stated herein, the Motion for Leave to File
Under Seal (Doc. 117) is GRANTED.
Defendant moves under Local Rule 5.10 to file its Third Amended Answer
under seal. Defendant previously submitted Exhibits 1-6, 10, and 14 under seal in
support of its Amended Answer to the Complaint (Doc. 58). On August 24, 2012,
the Court granted Micron’s unopposed motion to file these documents under
seal. Defendant provides that it relies on confidential documents (Exhibits 1-6
and 10) produced by Plaintiff during Discovery. In addition, Defendant relies
upon Exhibit 14, which is a confidential agreement between Defendant and
Lucent Technologies Inc.. Defendant maintains the sensitive and confidential
information contained in these documents forms the basis for affirmative
defenses and counterclaims within its Third Amended Answer.
1

The determination of whether the Agreement may remain under seal must
be balanced with the "[ ] common law right of public access to judicial records."
U.S. v. Corbitt, 879 F.2d 224, 228 (7th Cir. 1989), citing Nixon v. Warner
Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978). The Seventh Circuit has found that
judicial records should be "open to public inspection unless they meet the
definition of trade secrets or other categories of bona fide long-term
confidentiality." Baxter International, Inc. v. Abbott Labs, 297 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir.
2002). Here, the reason these particular documents were sealed in the first instance
remains viable; the documents contain sensitive patent information and a
confidential license agreement. Therefore, the information contained in these
documents falls within a category of long-term confidentiality, and the Court may
seal the records from the public.
The Court, having considered the submissions and arguments of Defendant
Micron Technology, Inc., hereby GRANTS Defendant’s Motion (Doc. 117).
Defendant has shown that filing Exhibits 1-6, 10, 14, and the Third Amended
Answer under seal is in the interest of protecting confidential information of
Plaintiff, Defendant, and Lucent Technologies, Inc..
It is so ordered.
Entered on August 23, 2016
s/Jonathan E. Hawley
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2