Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-02543/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-02543-17/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract

---

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

TESSERA, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

TOSHIBA CORPORATION,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-02543-BLF 

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO 

SEAL DOCUMENTS

[Re: ECF 211, 213, 218]

Before the Court are three administrative motions to seal, two from Defendant Toshiba 

Corp., and one from Plaintiff Tessera, Inc. See ECF 211, 213, 218. The motions relate to 

Toshiba’s motion to extend the time to complete discovery and the hearing on the parties’ motions 

for partial summary judgment. For the reasons discussed below, the motions are GRANTED.

I. LEGAL STANDARD

“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 

and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cty. 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 

motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden 

of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of 

access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 

1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79.

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.” Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., 727 F.3d 1214, 1228–29 (Fed. 

Case 5:15-cv-02543-BLF Document 225 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 6
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

Northern District of California

Cir. 2013). Records attached to motions that are “not related, or only tangentially related, to the 

merits of a case” therefore are not subject to the strong presumption of access. Ctr. for Auto 

Safety, 809 F.3d at 1099; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (“[T]he public has less of a need 

for access to court records attached only to non-dispositive motions because those documents are 

often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action.”). Parties moving 

to seal the documents attached to such motions must meet the lower “good cause” standard of 

Rule 26(c). Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted). This 

standard requires a “particularized showing,” id., that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the 

information is disclosed. 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). “Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated 

by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. 

Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992). 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). In part, Civ. L.R. 79-5(d) requires 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,” 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 

Case 5:15-cv-02543-BLF Document 225 Filed 10/24/16 Page 2 of 6
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

Northern District of California

redacted version.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d). “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).

II. DISCUSSION

The sealing motions at issue are resolved under different standards. The motions related to 

Toshiba’s motion to extend the time to complete discovery (ECF 211, 218) are resolved under the 

good cause standard because the underlying motion is not a dispositive motion. Toshiba’s motion 

to file under seal portions of the September 22, 2016 hearing transcript on summary judgment, 

however, is resolved under the compelling reasons standard because a hearing on summary 

judgment is more than tangentially related to the merits of this case. With the standards in mind, 

the Court rules on the instant motions as follows:

ECF 

No.

Document to be 

Sealed

Result Reasoning

211-4 Portions of the 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. The redacted portions include information 

related to Toshiba’s royalty payments 

pursuant to confidential license agreements 

between Toshiba and Tessera; findings of 

confidential royalty compliance inspections; 

and the business relationships between 

Tessera and a third-party service provider.

211-5 Ex. C to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contains information pertaining to the license 

terms and patents/technology involved in 

confidential license agreements between 

Toshiba and Tessera, confidential 

communications between Toshiba and 

Tessera, and royalty payments made by 

Toshiba pursuant to confidential license 

agreements. 

211-6 Ex. E to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential information related to 

Tessera’s business relationship with a thirdparty service provider. 

Case 5:15-cv-02543-BLF Document 225 Filed 10/24/16 Page 3 of 6
4

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

211-7 Ex. F to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential information related to 

Tessera’s business relationship with a thirdparty service provider.

211-8 Ex. G to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential information related to 

Tessera’s business relationship with a thirdparty service provider.

211-9 Ex. H to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential information related to 

Tessera’s business relationship with a thirdparty service provider.

211-10 Portions of Ex. N to 

the Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential address information and 

personal or private information of individuals 

and third parties.

211-12 Portions of Ex. O to 

the Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential address information and 

personal or private information of individuals 

and third parties.

211-14 Portions of Ex. P to 

the Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential address information and 

personal or private information of individuals 

and third parties.

211-16 Identified Portions of 

Ex. Q to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential address information and 

personal or private information of individuals 

and third parties.

Case 5:15-cv-02543-BLF Document 225 Filed 10/24/16 Page 4 of 6
5

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

211-18 Identified Portions of 

Ex. R to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential address information and 

personal or private information of individuals 

and third parties.

211-20 Identified Portions of 

Ex. S to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contain confidential address information and 

personal or private information of individuals 

and third parties.

211-22 Identified Portions of 

Ex. W to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Contains confidential emails, telephone, and 

facsimile numbers of Toshiba, Tessera, and 

KMPG personnel.

211-24 Ex. X to the 

Declaration of 

Fangzhou Qiu in 

Support of Toshiba’s 

Motion to Change 

Time

GRANTED. Summarizes the results of KPMG’s inspection 

of royalty reporting by Toshiba allegedly 

pursuant to confidential license agreements. 

Contains information pertaining to the license 

terms and patents / technology involved in 

confidential license agreements between 

Toshiba and Tessera and confidential data 

regarding Toshiba product types, 

manufacturing, sales timing and volumes, and 

royalty payments, and confidential 

communications between Toshiba and KPMG 

regarding such inspections.

213-3 Identified Portions of 

the Transcript of the 

September 22, 2016 

Hearing on 

Summary Judgment

GRANTED. Contain information pertaining to the terms 

and technologies involved in confidential 

license agreements between the parties; 

confidential communications between the 

parties regarding the terms, technologies, 

patents, products, and royalty obligations 

related to their confidential license 

agreements; confidential communications 

between Toshiba and a third-party service 

provider related to confidential license 

agreements between the parties; and 

confidential license agreements between 

Tessera and third-party licensees and their 

confidential communications. 

Case 5:15-cv-02543-BLF Document 225 Filed 10/24/16 Page 5 of 6
6

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

218-4 Identified Portions of 

Ex. 2 to the 

Declaration of Kim 

Meyer in Support of 

Tessera’s Opposition 

to Toshiba’s Motion 

to Change Time

GRANTED. References the confidential findings of 

KPMG’s audits of Toshiba.

218-6 Identified Portions of 

Ex. 3 to the 

Declaration of Kim 

Meyer in Support of 

Tessera’s Opposition 

to Toshiba’s Motion 

to Change Time

GRANTED. References the confidential findings of 

KPMG’s audits of Toshiba.

For the foregoing reasons, the sealing motions at ECF 211, 213, and 218 are GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 24, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-02543-BLF Document 225 Filed 10/24/16 Page 6 of 6