I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al
Filing
93
Memorandum in Support re 92 MOTION to Seal Portions of Google's Reply in Support of its Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Provide Conception, Reduction-to-Practice, and Priority Date Information, and Exhibits L, M, N and P to the Declaration of Margaret Kammerud in Support T filed by Google Inc.. (Noona, Stephen)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
NORFOLK DIVISION
I/P ENGINE, INC.
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-512
AOL, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF GOOGLE’S MOTION TO SEAL PORTIONS OF
GOOGLE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO
PROVIDE CONCEPTION, REDUCTION-TO-PRACTICE, AND PRIORITY DATE
INFORMATION, AND EXHIBITS L, M, N AND P TO THE DECLARATION OF
MARGARET KAMMERUD IN SUPPORT THEREOF
In support of its Motion to Seal pursuant to Local Rule 5, Plaintiff, Google, Inc.
(“Google”) states the following:
1.
Google moves the Court for leave to file under seal portions of Google’s Reply in
Support of its Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Provide Conception, Reduction-to-Practice, and
Priority Date Information for the Patents-in-Suit (“Portions of Google’s Reply”) and Exhibits L,
M, N and P to the Declaration of Margaret Kammerud in Support of Google’s Reply in Support
of its Motion to compel Plaintiff to Provide Conception, Reduction-to-Practice, and Priority Date
Information for the Patents-in-Suit (“Certain Exhibits to Kammerud Declaration”). Portions of
Google’s Reply and Certain Exhibits to Kammerud Declaration contain data that is confidential
under the Protective Order entered in this matter on January 23, 2012 (Dkt. No. 85) (“Protective
Order”).
2.
There are three requirements for sealing court findings: (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 Ashcraft v. Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 282, 288 (4th Cir. 2000)). Google contends
that Portions of Google’s Reply and Certain Exhibits to Kammerud Declaration contain data that
is and should be kept confidential. An in camera copy of Google’s Reply and Certain Exhibits
to Kammerud Declaration are being provided to the Court. In light of Google’s concerns and the
Protective Order, there appears to be no alternative that appropriately serves Google’s expressed
confidentiality concerns.
3.
For the sake of consistency with practices governing the case as a whole, Google
believes Portions of Google’s Reply and Certain Exhibits to Kammerud Declaration should
remain sealed and be treated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Protective Order.
Accordingly, and in satisfaction of the requirements of Local Rule 5, Google respectfully
asks the Court to enter the Proposed Agreed Order sealing Portions of Google’s Reply and
Certain Exhibits to Kammerud Declaration.
DATED: March 5, 2012
/s/ Stephen E. Noona
Stephen E. Noona
Virginia State Bar No. 25367
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 624.3000
Facsimile: (757) 624.3169
senoona@kaufcan.com
2
David Bilsker
David A. Perlson
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 875-6600
Facsimile: (415) 875-6700
davidbilsker@quinnemanuel.com
davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com
Attorneys for Google Inc.
3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 5, 2012, I will electronically file the foregoing with the
Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notification of such filing (NEF) to
the following:
Jeffrey K. Sherwood
Kenneth W. Brothers
DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP
1825 Eye Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 420-2200
Facsimile: (202) 420-2201
sherwoodj@dicksteinshapiro.com
brothersk@dicksteinshapiro.com
Donald C. Schultz
W. Ryan Snow
Steven Stancliff
CRENSHAW, WARE & MARTIN, P.L.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 1500
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 623-3000
Facsimile: (757) 623-5735
dschultz@cwm-law.cm
wrsnow@cwm-law.com
sstancliff@cwm-law.com
Counsel for Plaintiff, I/P Engine, Inc.
Stephen E. Noona
Virginia State Bar No. 25367
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 624-3000
Facsimile: (757) 624-3169
senoona@kaufcan.com
Counsel for Google Inc.,
Target Corporation,
IAC Search & Media, Inc., and
Gannet Co., Inc.
4
/s/ Stephen E. Noona
Stephen E. Noona
Virginia State Bar No. 25367
KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C.
150 West Main Street, Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: (757) 624.3000
Facsimile: (757) 624.3169
senoona@kaufcan.com
11581920_1.DOC
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?