I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al
Filing
685
Memorandum in Support re 684 MOTION to Seal Exhibits 1 and 4 to its Opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss All Claims Against AOL, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., and Target Corporation filed by I/P Engine, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sherwood, Jeffrey)
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 Exhibits 1
and 4 to its Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss All Claims Against AOL, Inc., Gannett
Co., Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., and Target Corporation. 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.
Exhibits 1 and 4 to its Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss All Claims
Against AOL, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., and Target Corporation
2.
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-3100042
that Exhibits 1 and 4 to its Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss All Claims Against
AOL, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., and Target Corporation 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, the
Exhibits 1 and 4 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 Exhibits 1 and 4 to its Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
All Claims Against AOL, Inc., Gannett Co., Inc., IAC Search & Media, Inc., and Target
Corporation. The Court shall retain sealed materials until forty-five (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: September ___, 2012
Entered:
____/____/____
__________________________
United States District Court
Eastern District of Virginia
2
DSMDB-3100042
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?