Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03750/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03750-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CORNING OPTICAL 

COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS LTD.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOLID, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO 

SEAL

(Re: Docket Nos. 296, 308, 317, 327, 343, 

346, 364)

Before the court are seven administrative motions to seal. “Historically, courts have 

recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including judicial 

records and documents.’”1 Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong 

presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.”2 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.3

However, “while protecting the public's interest in access to the courts, we must remain 

mindful of the parties’ right to access those same courts upon terms which will not unduly harm 

their competitive interest.”4 Records attached to nondispositive motions therefore are not subject 

 

1 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)).

2

Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)).

3

Id. at 1178-79.

4

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 727 F.3d 1214, 1228-29 (Fed. Cir. 2013). 

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 1 of 7
2

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

to the strong presumption of access.5 Because the documents attached to nondispositive motions 

“are often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action,” parties 

moving to seal must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 26(c).6 As with dispositive 

motions, the standard applicable to nondispositive motions requires a “particularized showing”7

that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the information is disclosed.8 “Broad allegations of 

harm, unsubstantiated by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice.9 A 

protective order sealing the documents during discovery may reflect the court’s previous 

determination that good cause exists to keep the documents sealed,10 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.11

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).”12 “Within 4 days of the filing of the Administrative 

 

5

See id. at 1180.

6

Id. at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted).

7

Id.

8

Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002); 

see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).

9

Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992).

10 See Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179-80.

11 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.”).

12 Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). In part, Civ. L.R. 79-5(d) requires the submitting party to attach a “proposed 

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 2 of 7
3

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

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.”13

With these standards in mind, the court rules on the instant motions as follows: 

Motion 

to Seal

Document to be Sealed Result Reason/Explanation

296 Supplemental Declaration 

of Barry Bruce in Support 

of Defendants’ Motion for 

Summary Judgment

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions sought to be 

sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

308 Defendants’ August 31, 

2015 Letter Brief

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

308 Exhibit 1 to Defendants’ 

Letter Brief

Docket No. 308-4 at pages 4-7 

(Appendix) SEALED; all other 

designations UNSEALED.

Only sealed portions 

narrowly tailored to 

confidential business 

information; portions 

of document contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

 

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,” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(b), and an 

“unredacted 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.” 

Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d).

13 Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 3 of 7
4

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

317 Plaintiff’s Motion in 

Limine #2

UNSEALED Portions sought to be 

sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

317 Exhibit A to Plaintiff’s 

Motion in Limine #2

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

327 Defendants’ Motions in 

Limine

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

some portions sought 

to be sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

327 Defendants’ Motion to 

Exclude Expert Testimony 

of Michele Riley

UNSEALED Portions sought to be 

sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

327 Defendants’ Trial Exhibit 

List (Exhibit F to Joint 

Pretrial Statement)

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information.

327 Exhibit 2 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information.

327 Exhibit 3 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information.

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 4 of 7
5

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

327 Exhibit 5 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Portions sought to be 

sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

327 Exhibit 6 to the Platt 

Declaration

SEALED Narrowly tailored to 

confidential business 

information.

327 Exhibit 8 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

327 Exhibit 12 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

327 Exhibit 13 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

327 Exhibit 14 to the Platt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 5 of 7
6

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

343 Plaintiff’s Opposition to 

Defendants’ Motion to 

Exclude Expert Testimony 

of Michele Riley

UNSEALED Portions sought to be 

sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

343 Exhibit D to the Stover 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

346 Plaintiff’s Opposition to 

Defendants’ Motions in 

Limine

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

some portions sought 

to be sealed contain 

information later 

publicly disclosed at 

trial.

346 Exhibit 1 to the Hunt 

Declaration

UNSEALED No declaration in 

support filed with the 

court as required by 

Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

346 Exhibit 2 to the Hunt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information.

346 Exhibit 3 to the Hunt 

Declaration

SEALED Narrowly tailored to 

confidential business 

information.

346 Exhibit 4 to the Hunt 

Declaration

UNSEALED Not narrowly tailored 

to confidential 

business information; 

portions of document 

contain information 

later publicly 

disclosed at trial.

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 6 of 7
7

Case No. 14-cv-03750-PSG

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: MOTIONS TO SEAL

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

Northern District of California

364 Defendants’ Opposition to 

Plaintiff’s Motion for 

Reconsideration of 

Summary Judgment Order

UNSEALED No declaration in 

support filed with the 

court as required by 

Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2015

_________________________________

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:14-cv-03750-PSG Document 424 Filed 11/02/15 Page 7 of 7