Filed: Dec. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 04, 2015
Summary: ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL RONALD M. WHYTE , District Judge . Before the court are administrative motions to seal a number of documents related to the parties' summary judgment briefing. "Historically, courts have recognized a `general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.'" Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 , 597 & n. 7 (1978)). Acco
Summary: ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL RONALD M. WHYTE , District Judge . Before the court are administrative motions to seal a number of documents related to the parties' summary judgment briefing. "Historically, courts have recognized a `general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.'" Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 , 597 & n. 7 (1978)). Accor..
More
ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL
RONALD M. WHYTE, District Judge.
Before the court are administrative motions to seal a number of documents related to the parties' summary judgment briefing. "Historically, courts have recognized a `general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents.'" Kamakana v. City & County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n. 7 (1978)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, "a `strong presumption in favor of access' is the starting point." Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to dispositive motions bear the burden of overcoming the presumption with "compelling reasons" that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Id. at 1178-79.
A protective order sealing the documents during discovery may reflect the court's previous determination that good cause exists to keep the documents sealed, see Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80, but a blanket protective order that allows the parties to designate confidential documents does not provide sufficient judicial scrutiny to determine whether each particular document should remain sealed. See Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A) ("Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are sealable.").
In addition to making particularized showings of good cause, parties moving to seal documents must comply with the procedures established by Civ. L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 79-5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request that establishes the document is "sealable," or "privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the law." "The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material, and must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d)." Civ. L.R. 79-5(b) (requiring the submitting party to attach a "proposed order that is narrowly tailored to seal only the sealable material" which "lists in table format each document or portion thereof that is sought to be sealed," and an "unreadacted version of the document" that indicates "by highlighting or other clear method, the portions of the document that have been omitted from the redacted version."). "Within 4 days of the filing of the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration as required by subsection 79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable." Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).
With these standards in mind, the courts rules on the instant motions as follows.
Preliminarily, the court grants F5's motion to remove incorrectly filed documents, Dkt. No. 220.
Motion
to Seal Document to be Sealed Ruling Reason/Explanation
179 Radware MSJ GRANTED-IN-PART and Not narrowly tailored.
Infringement (179-4) DENIED-IN-PART. See rulings on cited
documents below.
179 Exhibit 4: Stamm DENIED. No supporting
Deposition (179-6) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 7: F5 email (179-7) DENIED. No supporting
declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 8: Needham DENIED. No supporting
deposition (179-8) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 9: F5 document GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
(179-9) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 11: F5 email GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
(179-10) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 12: F5 document GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
(179-11) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 13: F5 document GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
(179-12) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 14: F5 email DENIED. No supporting
(179-13) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 15: Needham email DENIED. No supporting
(179-14) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 16: Needham email DENIED. No supporting
(179-15) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 17: F5 email DENIED. No supporting
(179-16) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 18: Radware Test GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
(179-17) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 19: Thornewell DENIED. No supporting
deposition (179-18) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 24: Alexander DENIED. No supporting
deposition (179-19) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 25: Masters DENIED. No supporting
deposition (179-20) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 26: Brewer GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
deposition (179-21) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 27: Skene GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
deposition (179-22) confidential business
information.
179 Exhibit 28: F5 DENIED. No supporting
interrogatory response declaration filed; not
(179-23) narrowly tailored.
179 Exhibit 31: Melton GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
deposition (179-24) confidential business
information.
179 Rubin Infringement GRANTED as to charts C-1-C-3. Radware failed to
Declaration Ex. 1 and C-1-C-3 DENIED as to main expert propose narrowly
(179-26-179-29) report (179-26). tailored redactions to
report, much of which
is unrelated to
confidential business
information. Charts cite
many confidential
documents.
181 F5 MSJ on Invalidity GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
redactions (yellow highlighting) confidential business
at pages 12:8-17, 21:24-22:1, information.
22:25-26, and 24:1-3, otherwise
DENIED.
181 Exhibit 1: Peles Deposition GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(181-6) confidential business
information.
181 Exhibit 2: Rubin DENIED. Not narrowly tailored;
Deposition (181-8) filed excerpts relate
largely to prior art.
181 Exhibit 18: Internal F5 GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Document (181-10) confidential business
information.
184 Brewer Decl. (184-4) GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
184 F5 MSJ on Damages DENIED as to redactions Narrowly tailored to
(184-6) (yellow highlighting) at 2:21-3:2; confidential business
17:10-15; otherwise information.
GRANTED.
184 Exhibit 1: Trachtman Depo DENIED. No confidential
(184-8) information.
184 Exhibit 2: Peles Depo DENIED. No confidential
(185-2) information.
184 Exhibit 3: Brewer Depo GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(184-10) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
184 Exhibit 4: Darwin Depo GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(184-12) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
184 Exhibit 6: Stamm Report GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Excerpts (184-14) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
184 Exhibit 8: Radware Sales GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
(185-2) confidential business
information.
184 Exhibit 9: Brain Depo GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(184-16) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
184 Exhibit 10: Malackowski DENIED. Not narrowly tailored.
Rep. Excerpts (185-3) Radware revealed some
of the information from
the report in Dkt. No.
205 at 23-24.
186 Radware MSJ on Invalidity GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(186-4) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
186 Exhibit 1: Stamm Depo DENIED. No supporting
(186-6) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
186 Exhibit 2: Zisapel Depo GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(186-7) confidential business
information.
186 Exhibit 3: Zisapel email GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(186-8) confidential business
information.
186 Exhibit 4: Peles Depo GRANTED Narrowly tailored to
(186-9) confidential business
information.
186 Exhibit 7: Alexander Depo DENIED. No supporting
(186-10) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
186 Exhibit 12: Masters Depo DENIED. No supporting
(186-11) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
186 Exhibit 13: Thornewell DENIED. No supporting
Depo (186-12) declaration filed;
contains no
confidential
information.
186 Exhibit 15: Cisco White DENIED. No supporting
Paper (186-13) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
186 Exhibit 19: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-14) information.
186 Exhibit 20: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-15) information.
186 Exhibit 21: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-16) information.
186 Exhibit 22: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-17) information.
186 Exhibit 23: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-18) information.
186 Exhibit 24: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-19) information.
186 Exhibit 25: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware Document confidential business
(186-20) information.
186 Exhibit 26: Internal GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Radware email (186-21) confidential business
information.
186 Rubin Declaration (186-23) GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
186 Rubin Declaration Exhibit GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
1: Rubin Rebuttal Report redactions at ¶ 39, l.4; ¶ 40, l.3; confidential business
(186-24) ¶¶ 68-71; ¶¶ 173-176. information.
188 F5 MSJ Noninfringement GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(188-4) redactions (blue highlighting). confidential business
information.
188 Thornewell Decl. (188-6) GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
188 Exhibit 1: Rubin Depo GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(188-8) confidential business
information.
188 Exhibit 3: Rubin GRANTED in its entirety. Narrowly tailored to
Infringement Chart confidential business
(188-10) information.
188 Exhibit 4: Alexander GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Report (188-12) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
196 F5 Opp. to Radware MSJ GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
on Invalidity (196-4) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
198 Exhibit 1: Masters Depo GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(198-4) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
198 Exhibit 2: Thornewell GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Depo (198-6) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
198 Exhibit 3: Stamm Report GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(198-8) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
198 Exhibit 4: Brewer Depo. GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(198-10) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
198 Exhibit 9: Alexander GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Report (198-12) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
198 F5 Opp. to Radware MSJ GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Infringement (198-14) redactions (blue highlighting). confidential business
information.
200 Radware Opp. to F5 MSJ GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Non-Infringement (200-4) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
200 Exhibit A: Alexander DENIED. No supporting
Deposition (200-6) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
200 Exhibit B: Thornewell GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Deposition (200-7) confidential business
information.
202 Radware Opp. to F5 MSJ GRANTED as to proposed See ruling on Dkt. No.
on Invalidity (202-4) redactions (highlights) at 4:10-28; 202-6. Remaining
5:1-8; 6:2, 10; 9:22-28; 10:1-5; proposals are narrowly
5; 22:15-17; and 24:7-8 tailored to confidential
business information.
DENIED as to proposed
redactions (highlights) at 9:20-
and 22; 22:11-12, 18-22.
202 Exhibit B: F5 White Paper DENIED. No supporting
(202-6) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Radware's Opposition to GRANTED as to redactions No supporting
F5's MSJ on Damages (yellow highlighting) at 2:4-15; declaration filed
(204-4) 14:24-25; 15:4-12; 16:9-18; re: F5's information;
otherwise DENIED. not narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 1: Schaller Depo DENIED. No supporting
(204-6) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 2: Zisapel Depo GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(204-7-204-8) confidential business
information.
204 Exhibit 3: Trachtman GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Depo. (204-9) confidential business
information.
204 Exhibit 9: Skene email DENIED. No supporting
(204-10) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 10: Campa Depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-11) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 11: Campa email DENIED. No supporting
(204-12-204-15) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 12: Campa email DENIED. No supporting
(204-16) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 13: Campa email DENIED. No supporting
(204-17) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 14: Notice of DENIED. No supporting
Allowance (204-18) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 15: F5 DENIED. No supporting
Interrogatory responses declaration filed; not
(204-19) narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 16: Campa letter DENIED. No supporting
(204-20) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 18: Campa email DENIED. No supporting
(204-21) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 19: Campa email DENIED. No supporting
(204-22) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 20: Campa email DENIED. No supporting
(204-23) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 23: F5 CAT email DENIED. No supporting
(204-24) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 24: Stamm Depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-25) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 25: Melton Depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-26) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 26: Stamm Rep. DENIED. No supporting
(204-27) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 27: Darwin Depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-28) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 28: Brewer Depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-29) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 29: Cherkassky GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Depo. (204-30) confidential business
information.
204 Exhibit 30: Malackowski DENIED. Not narrowly tailored.
Depo. (204-31)
204 Exhibit 31: Brewer email DENIED. No supporting
(204-32) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 32: Peles depo. DENIED. Contains no
(204-33) confidential
information.
204 Exhibit 33: Brewer email DENIED. No supporting
(204-34) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 34: Brewer email DENIED. No supporting
(204-35) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 35: Brewer email DENIED. No supporting
(204-36) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 36: Rubin depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-37) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 38: Banks depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-38) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
204 Exhibit 40: Brain depo. DENIED. No supporting
(204-39) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
206 Exhibit A: 30(b)(6) letter DENIED. No supporting
(206-4) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
206 Exhibit B: Radware: DENIED. No supporting
Discovery Responses declaration filed; not
(206-5) narrowly tailored.
206 Exhibit D: Brewer Depo. GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(206-6) confidential business
information.
206 Exhibit E: Alexander GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Depo. (206-7) confidential business
information.
206 Exhibit G: Brain Depo. GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(206-8) confidential business
information.
206 Exhibit H: Malackowski DENIED. No supporting
Report (206-9) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
206 Exhibit I: F5 Responses to DENIED. No supporting
Interrogatories (206-10) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
206 Exhibit K: Radware RFP DENIED. No supporting
(206-11) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
209 Radware Reply in Support GRANTED as to redactions Narrowly tailored to
of MSJ on Invalidity (highlighting). confidential business
(209-4) information.
209 Exhibit A: Alexander DENIED No supporting
Report (209-6) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
209 Exhibit B: Zisapel Depo GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(209-8) confidential business
information.
209 Exhibit C: Alexander Depo DENIED No supporting
(209-10) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
209 Exhibit D: Cherkassky GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Depo (209-12) confidential business
information.
209 Exhibit E: Zisapel Depo, GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
Email (209-14) confidential business
information.
210 Radware Reply re: DENIED as to redactions at page Narrowly tailored to
Infringement (210-3) 9 (yellow highlighting); confidential business
otherwise GRANTED information.
210 Rubin Supp. Decl. GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(210-11) confidential business
information.
210 Exhibit 33: Alexander Dep. DENIED. No supporting
(210-7) declaration from F5
filed; not narrowly
tailored.
210 Exhibit 34: Brewer Dep. GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(210-9) confidential business
information.
214 Exhibit 1: Rubin Depo DENIED. Declaration does not
Excerpts (214-6) specify what
information is
confidential.
215 F5 Reply In Support of GRANTED as to redactions Narrowly tailored to
Motion For Summary (blue highlighting). confidential business
Judgement on Damages information.
Issues (215-3)
215 Declaration of Ramsey Al-Salam GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(215-5) redactions (blue highlighting). confidential business
information.
215 Exhibit 1: Radware sales GRANTED (sealed in its Narrowly tailored to
reports (215-7) entirety) confidential business
information.
215 Exhibit 2: Radware sales GRANTED (sealed in its Narrowly tailored to
reports (215-8) entirety) confidential business
information.
215 Exhibit 3: Schaller Depo. GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(215-9) redactions. confidential business
information.
215 Exhibit 4: Brewer Depo. DENIED. No motion or
(215-11) supporting declaration
filed.
217 Motion for Summary GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Judgment of redactions (blue highlighting). confidential business
Noninfringement (217-3) information.
217 Exhibit 1: Malackowski DENIED. No motion or
Depo. (217-6) supporting declaration
filed.
217 Exhibit 2: Alexander GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Non-Infringement Report redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
(217-7) information.
217 Exhibit 3: Rubin Depo. GRANTED. Narrowly tailored to
(217-9) confidential business
information.
217 Exhibit 4: Brewer Depo. GRANTED as to redactions at Narrowly tailored to
(217-10) 45:3-25 (yellow highlighting); confidential business
otherwise DENIED. information. The
parties cannot redact
the title page of the
deposition.
217 Exhibit 5: Alexander Depo. GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
(217-12) redactions (yellow highlighting). confidential business
information.
218 Exhibit 3: Brewer Depo. DENIED. No motion or
Excerpts (218-7) supporting declaration
filed.
218 Exhibit 4: Alexander GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Rebuttal Report (221-1) redactions (red boxes). confidential business
information.
218 Exhibit 5: Rubin Initial GRANTED as to proposed Narrowly tailored to
Report (221-3) redactions (red boxes). confidential business
information.
225 Exhibit P: Thornewell DENIED. No supporting
Depo. Excerpts (225-10) declaration filed; not
narrowly tailored.
225 Radware's Reply in DENIED. No supporting
support of Motion for declaration filed;
Sanctions (225-3) redactions do not refer
to any specific source
code.
All denials are without prejudice. The parties shall file, within 14 days, (1) versions of documents with only the redactions approved by this order or (2) revised sealing motions for the court's consideration addressing the court's reasons for denial discussed above. Failure to comply with this order will result in the clerk unsealing the documents listed above for which a motion to seal has been denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
