Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04966/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04966-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court 

For the Northern District of California 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

In re CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. 

SECURITIES LITIGATION 

)

)

)

Case No. 08-4966 SC 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 

FILE UNDER SEAL

This Order Relates to: 

 

CASE NOS. 08-4966 SC, 08-5027 SC, 

and 08-5273 SC 

)

)

)

)

)

)

 Plaintiff Alaska Electrical Pension Fund ("Plaintiff") brings 

this Administrative Motion to file under seal certain documents 

designated as confidential by Defendant Cadence Design Systems, 

Inc. ("Defendant"). Docket No. 111 ("Motion"). Pursuant to a 

protective order granted by the Court, see Docket No. 112 

("Stipulated Protective Order"), Defendant has designated certain 

documents it produced in discovery as confidential. In Plaintiff's 

Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 

("MPSJ Opp'n"), which Plaintiff filed under seal, Plaintiff 

referenced a number of these documents. Plaintiff also attached 

these documents as exhibits to a declaration in support of its MPSJ 

Opposition, which Plaintiff also filed under seal. Williams Decl., 

Exs. 1-18, 28, 29.1

 

 Civil Local Rule 79-5(d) requires a party seeking to file a 

 

1

 Shawn A. Williams ("Williams"), counsel for Plaintiff, filed a 

declaration in support of the MPSJ Opposition. 

Case 3:08-cv-04966-SC Document 121 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 3
2 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California 

document designated as confidential by another party to file an 

administrative motion with the court. The designating party then 

has seven days to preserve the document's confidentiality by filing 

and serving a "declaration establishing that the designated 

information is sealable" and "a narrowly tailored proposed sealing 

order." Id. Both parties have complied with this rule: Plaintiff 

filed the present Motion, and Defendant submitted a declaration 

explaining in detail why the material is proprietary and 

confidential business information. See Cooley Decl.2 Defendant 

seeks to protect some, but not all, of the documents, and it has 

identified the specific language it seeks to keep confidential by 

attaching suggested redacted versions of each document. See id., 

Exs. 4, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 17, 18, 28, 29. 

 The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART this Motion. The 

following documents attached as exhibits to the Cooley Declaration 

shall be filed under seal: 

• Exhibit 4 (Bates numbered CDNS00003667-3668); 

• Exhibit 6 (Bates numbered CDNS00000971-0972); 

• Exhibit 7 (Bates numbered CDNS00000975-0979); 

• Exhibit 8 (Bates numbered CDNS00000474-0479); 

• Exhibit 13 (Bates numbered CDNS00002729-2730); 

• Exhibit 14 (Bates numbered CDNS00002617-2638); 

• Exhibit 17 (Bates numbered CDNS00002582-2604); 

• Exhibit 18 (Bates numbered CDNS00000374-0378); 

• Exhibit 28 (Bates numbered CDNS00002049); and 

• Exhibit 29 (Bates numbered CDNS00000538-0539). 

 

2

 Tom Cooley ("Cooley"), counsel for Defendant, has filed a 

declaration in support of the Motion. Docket No. 111. 

Case 3:08-cv-04966-SC Document 121 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 3
3 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United 

States District 

Court

For the Northern District of California 

 Plaintiffs shall e-file the above-listed documents, but only 

in the redacted form proposed by Defendants. Plaintiffs shall efile Exhibits 1-3, 5, 9-12, 15-16, 19-27, and 30-47 without 

redaction. Plaintiff shall also e-file a version of its MPSJ 

Opposition in which any reference to the redacted text in the above 

documents is redacted. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 17, 2010 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 3:08-cv-04966-SC Document 121 Filed 06/17/10 Page 3 of 3