ORDER

BARBARA B. CRABB, District Judge.

Defendants ATI Technologies, Inc., ATI Technologies, ULC and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. have responded to this court's order directing the parties to show cause why the sealed documents in this case should not be unsealed so that they can be sent to the federal records center for long-term storage. Dkt. ##868 and 874. Nonparty Intel Corporation has filed an objection as well. Dkt. #877. Plaintiff Silicon Graphics, Inc. did not file an objection to unsealing any of the documents.

In their response, defendants request that 19 documents remain under seal. Dkt. ## 82-3, 85, 104, 121, 122, 236-9, 236-10, 237-1, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 330, 364, 602, 701 and 806. In its response, Intel repeats defendants' request to keep docket nos. 364, 701 and 806 sealed.

Defendants and Intel say that the documents at issue contain confidential licensing agreements or confidential information about the way their products work. Under these circumstances, I am persuaded that the documents listed may remain sealed. The only exception is docket no. 270, which includes presentations to customers and potential customers. Because defendants do not identify any confidential information in that document, I decline to keep it sealed.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that the clerk of court is directed to keep the following documents SEALED: dkt. ##82-3, 85, 104, 121, 122, 236-9, 236-10, 237-1, 266, 267, 268, 269, 271, 330, 364, 602, 701 and 806. The clerk is directed to UNSEAL all other documents.