I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 1025

MOTION to Seal I/P Engines Opening Brief on Post-Judgment Royalties and accompanying Declarations of Drs. Stephen Becker and Ophir Frieder by I/P Engine, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sherwood, Jeffrey)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
NORFOLK DIVISION
__________________________________________
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
AOL, INC. et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
I/P ENGINE, INC.,

Civ. Action No. 2:11-cv-512

MOTION TO SEAL I/P ENGINE, INC.’S OPENING BRIEF ON POST-JUDGMENT
ROYALTIES AND ACCOMPANYING DECLARATIONS OF DRS. STEPHEN BECKER
AND OPHIR FRIEDER
Pursuant to Local Rule 5 and the Agreed Protective Order entered by the Court [Dkt. No.
85], Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc. (“I/P Engine”) respectfully moves this Court for entry of the
attached Order permitting Plaintiff to file under seal its Opening Brief on Post-Judgment
Royalties and accompanying Declarations of Drs. Stephen Becker and Ophir Frieder
(collectively “Opening Brief”). Grounds and authorities for this Motion are set forth in I/P
Engine’s Memorandum in Support of Motion to Seal. In compliance with Local Rule 5, I/P
Engine attaches a Proposed Agreed Order as Exhibit 1 and is filing separately a Public Notice of
I/P Engine’s Motion to Seal. I/P Engine requests that the Court retain sealed materials until
forty-five (45) days after a final order is entered and request that, unless the case is appealed, any
sealed materials be returned to counsel for the filing parties. The parties have agreed that
confidential materials should be filed under seal.

DSMDB-3209127

Dated: October 30, 2013

By: /s/ Jeffrey K. Sherwood
Donald C. Schultz (Virginia Bar No. 30531)
W. Ryan Snow (Virginia Bar No. 47423)
CRENSHAW, WARE & MARTIN PLC
150 West Main Street
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Jeffrey K. Sherwood (Virginia Bar No. 19222)
Frank C. Cimino, Jr.
Kenneth W. Brothers
Charles J. Monterio, Jr.
DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP
1825 Eye Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Counsel for Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc.

2
DSMDB-3209127

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 30th day of October, 2013, the foregoing was served
via the Court’s CM/ECF system, on the following:
Stephen Edward Noona
Kaufman & Canoles, P.C.
150 W Main St
Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
[e-mail]
David Bilsker
David Perlson
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Robert L. Burns
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Two Freedom Square
11955 Freedom Drive
Reston, VA 20190
[e-mail]
Cortney S. Alexander
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
3500 SunTrust Plaza
303 Peachtree Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 94111
[e-mail]
/s/ Jeffrey K. Sherwood

3
DSMDB-3209127

EXHIBIT 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
NORFOLK DIVISION
__________________________________________
)
I/P ENGINE, INC.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
AOL, INC. et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Civ. Action No. 2:11-cv-512

[PROPOSED] AGREED ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc.’s (“I/P Engine”) Motion to Seal its Opening
Brief on Post-Judgment Royalties and accompanying Declarations of Drs. Stephen Becker and
Ophir Frieder (collectively “Opening Brief”). After considering the Motion to Seal, Order and
related filings, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion to Seal should be granted. It is
therefore ORDERED as follows:
1.

I/P Engine, Inc.’s Opening Brief on Post-Judgment Royalties.

2.

Declarations of Dr. Ophir Frieder.

3.

Declarations of Dr. Stephen Becker.

4.

There are three requirements for sealing court filings: (1) public notice with an

opportunity to object; (2) consideration of less drastic alternatives; and (3) a statement of specific
findings in support of a decision to seal and rejecting alternatives to sealing. See, e.g., Flexible
Benefits Council v. Feldman, No. 1:08-CV-371, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93039 (E.D. Va. Nov.
13, 2008) (citing Ashcroft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 282, 288 (4th Cir. 2000)). This Court finds

DSMDB-3209127

that I/P Engine, Inc.’s Opening Brief may contain data that is confidential under the Protective
Order entered in this matter on January 23, 2012; that public notice has been given, that no
objections have been filed; that the public’s interest in access is outweighed by the interests in
preserving such confidentiality; and that there are no alternatives that appropriately serve these
interests.
3.

For the sake of consistency with practices governing the case as a whole, I/P

Engine, Inc.’s Opening Brief shall remain sealed and be treated in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the Protective Order.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal is granted and I/P Engine is
permitted to file under seal its Opening Brief. The Court shall retain sealed materials until fortyfive (45) days after entry of a final order. If the case is not appealed, any sealed materials should
then be returned to counsel for the filing party.

Dated: October ___, 2013

Entered:

____/____/____

__________________________
United States District Court
Eastern District of Virginia

2
DSMDB-3209127