Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02972/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-02972-53/pdf.json

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

---

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

VNUS MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Plaintiff

 v.

DIOMED HOLDINGS, INC., et al.,

Defendants

 /

No. C-05-2972 MMC

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART JOINT STIPULATED

MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF

TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

(DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS IN LIMINE);

DIRECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulated Motion for Administrative Relief to

File Documents Under Seal, filed October 1, 2007, by which defendants seek leave to file

under seal unredacted versions of two motions in limine and certain exhibits offered in

support thereof. Having reviewed the Declaration of Mark Kertz, filed October 4, 2007 on

behalf of plaintiff, the Court rules as follows:

1. The motion is GRANTED in part, specifically, as to the following documents that

plaintiff has shown contain material properly filed under seal:

a. Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 4;

b. Exhibit J to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 4; and

c. Exhibit K to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Case 3:05-cv-02972-MMC Document 527 Filed 10/11/07 Page 1 of 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

2

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 4.

2. The motion is DENIED in part, specifically, with respect to the following

documents, as to which plaintiff has withdrawn its prior designation of confidentiality, (see

Kertz Decl. ¶¶ 4, 5):

a. Exhibit B to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 4;

b. Exhibit L to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 4;

c. Exhibit M to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 4;

d. Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 7;

e. Exhibit C to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 7; and

f. Exhibit D to the Declaration of Charles T. Steenburg In Support of

Defendants’ Motion in Limine No. 7.

3. If defendants wish the Court to consider the six documents identified in the prior

paragraph, defendants are DIRECTED to file them in the public record no later than

October 15, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 11, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-02972-MMC Document 527 Filed 10/11/07 Page 2 of 2