Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05235/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05235-88/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

POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR

INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-5235 MMC

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL

(DKT. NO. 582); DIRECTIONS TO

PLAINTIFF

Before the Court is plaintiff’s Administrative Motion to Seal (see Dkt. No. 582), filed

May 9, 2014, by which motion plaintiff seeks to file under seal redacted portions of its

Motion for a Permanent Injunction, as well as the entirety of thirteen exhibits to the

declaration of Michael R. Headley in support thereof. The documents plaintiff seeks to file

under seal comprise material deemed confidential by plaintiff as well as material

designated by defendants as confidential. Having read and considered plaintiff’s

administrative motions, the Court rules as follows.

A party moving to file material under seal must include a “declaration establishing

that the document sought to be filed under seal, or portions thereof, are sealable,” see Civil

L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(A), and, where the material is submitted in support of a dispositive motion,

such party must “articulate compelling reasons supported by specific fact[s],” see

Case 3:09-cv-05235-MMC Document 604 Filed 07/28/14 Page 1 of 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

2

Kamakana v. City & Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006). Additionally,

where the submitting party seeks to file under seal a document designated as confidential

by the opposing party, “the Designating Party must file a declaration . . . establishing that

all of the designated information is sealable.” Civil L.R. 79-5(e)(1). “If the Designating

Party does not file a responsive declaration as required by subsection 79-5(e)(1) and the

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal is denied, the Submitting Party may file the

document in the public record no earlier than 4 days, and no later than 10 days, after the

motion is denied.” Id. at 79-5(e)(2).

With respect to Exhibits H-K and M to the Headley Declaration and the redacted

portions of the motion based thereon, plaintiff asserts such material discloses “sensitive

internal details” concerning its customers and accounts. (See Dkt. No. 582, Headley Decl.

¶¶ 8-11, 13, 16.) The Court, having reviewed the subject material, finds plaintiff has made

the requisite showing of “compelling reasons” for the relief sought. See Kamakana, 447

F.3d at 1178.

With respect to Exhibits C-G, L, and P-Q to the Headley Declaration and the

redacted portions of the motion based thereon, plaintiff’s sole basis for seeking sealing is

that said documents have been designated by defendants as confidential. (See Dkt. No.

582, Headley Decl. ¶¶ 3-7, 12, 14-16). To date, defendants have not filed a responsive

declaration to plaintiff’s administrative motion.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated:

1. To the extent plaintiff seeks to file under seal Exhibits H-K and M to the Headley

Declaration and the redacted portions of the motion for injunctive relief based thereon,

plaintiff’s Administrative Motion is hereby GRANTED, and said documents shall remain

filed under seal.

2. To the extent plaintiff seeks to file under seal Exhibits C-G, L, and P-Q to the

Headley Declaration and the redacted portions of the motion for injunctive relief based

thereon, plaintiff’s Administrative Motion is hereby DENIED, and plaintiff is hereby

DIRECTED to file said documents and the redacted portions of the motion based thereon

Case 3:09-cv-05235-MMC Document 604 Filed 07/28/14 Page 2 of 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

3

in the public record no earlier than August 1 and no later than August 7, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 28, 2014 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-05235-MMC Document 604 Filed 07/28/14 Page 3 of 3