Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Micron Technology, Inc. v. United Microelectronics Corporation, 17-cv-06932-MMC. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180828a53 Visitors: 18
Filed: Aug. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART, AND DEFERRING IN PART RULING ON PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . Before the Court is plaintiff Micron Technology, Inc.'s "Administrative Motion to File Under Seal," filed August 13, 2018, and a declaration in support thereof. In response thereto, defendant United Microelectronics Corporation has filed a responsive declaration, as has non-party Applied Materials, Inc. Ha
More

ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART, AND DEFERRING IN PART RULING ON PLAINTIFF'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF

Before the Court is plaintiff Micron Technology, Inc.'s "Administrative Motion to File Under Seal," filed August 13, 2018, and a declaration in support thereof. In response thereto, defendant United Microelectronics Corporation has filed a responsive declaration, as has non-party Applied Materials, Inc. Having read and considered the papers filed in support of and in response to the motion, the Court rules as follows.

1. To the extent plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal each of the following documents, the motion is hereby GRANTED, plaintiff having filed in the public record redacted versions thereof that are sufficiently "narrowly tailored," see Civil L.R. 79-5(b) (providing request "must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material"):

a. The unredacted version of the Supplemental Opposition to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction;

b. The unredacted version of the Declaration of Dr. David Liu;

c. The unredacted version of the Declaration of Victor Kelly;

d. The unredacted version of the Declaration of Michael Bandemer and the unredacted versions of Exhibits 3-6 thereto.

2. To the extent plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal Exhibits 6-8, 10-22, 24-25, 27-32, 39-45, 47-48 to the Declaration of Douglas L. Clark, the motion is hereby GRANTED, the designating party or parties having shown the entirety of said documents are properly filed under seal.

3. To the extent plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal Exhibit 23 to the Declaration of Douglas L. Clark, the motion is hereby DENIED, the designating party, defendant, having failed to show the document is properly filed under seal, see Civil L.R. 79-5(e)1) (providing designating party must show "designated material is sealable"), and plaintiff is hereby DIRECTED to file said exhibit in the public record "no earlier than 4 days, and no later than 10 days, after" August 27, 2018, see Civil L.R. 79-5(e)(2).

4. To the extent plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal Exhibits 1-4 and 26 to the Declaration of Douglas L. Clark, ruling on the motion is hereby DEFERRED, the designating party or parties having failed to show the entirety of said documents are properly filed under seal, but it appearing that some portions thereof are properly filed under seal; the Court hereby affords the parties leave to file, no later than September 3, 2018, a supplemental declaration or declarations identifying the specific portions of said exhibits that comprise material properly filed under seal. See Civil L.R. 79-5(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer