Finjan, Inc. v. Juniper Network, Inc., 17-cv-05659-WHA (TSH). (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190530b43
Visitors: 11
Filed: May 29, 2019
Latest Update: May 29, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL Re: Dkt. No. 483 THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . In connection with the joint discovery letter brief the parties filed concerning Juniper's motion to compel the production of documents by non-party Dawn-Marie Bey, ECF No. 484, Juniper filed a motion to seal. ECF No. 483. The motion sought to seal three privilege logs not because Juniper thought they were confidential, but because Finjan and Bey designated them as such. Under this Court's Local Rule 79-5(e
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL Re: Dkt. No. 483 THOMAS S. HIXSON , Magistrate Judge . In connection with the joint discovery letter brief the parties filed concerning Juniper's motion to compel the production of documents by non-party Dawn-Marie Bey, ECF No. 484, Juniper filed a motion to seal. ECF No. 483. The motion sought to seal three privilege logs not because Juniper thought they were confidential, but because Finjan and Bey designated them as such. Under this Court's Local Rule 79-5(e)..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SEAL
Re: Dkt. No. 483
THOMAS S. HIXSON, Magistrate Judge.
In connection with the joint discovery letter brief the parties filed concerning Juniper's motion to compel the production of documents by non-party Dawn-Marie Bey, ECF No. 484, Juniper filed a motion to seal. ECF No. 483. The motion sought to seal three privilege logs not because Juniper thought they were confidential, but because Finjan and Bey designated them as such. Under this Court's Local Rule 79-5(e)(1), Finjan and/or Bey were required to "file a declaration as required by subsection 79-5(d)(1) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable" "[w]ithin 4 days of the filing" of the motion to seal. The motion to seal was filed on May 22, 2019. Due to the weekend and Memorial Day holiday, the first court day four days after the motion was filed was yesterday, and no declaration was filed. In addition, the Court does not see how the public disclosure of these logs could give rise to competitive harm. They are essentially long lists of repetitive, high-level descriptions of documents that do not reveal their contents. The motion to seal at ECF No. 483 is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
