Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148-63/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 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

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO.,

LTD.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MEDIATEK, INC., et al.,

Defendants 

MEDIATEK, INC,

Counterclaimant,

 v.

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO.,

LTD., et al.

Counterclaim Defendants

 /

No. C 05-3148 MMC

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DEFERRING IN PART RULING ON

DEFENDANTS’ ADMINISTRATIVE

MOTION TO FILE CONFIDENTIAL

DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;

DIRECTIONS TO CLERK

Before the Court is defendants’ “Unopposed Administrative Motion Pursuant to Local

Rules 7-11 and 79-5(b) to File Confidential Documents Under Seal,” filed April 20, 2007, by

which motion defendants seek leave to file under seal documents filed in connection with

defendants’ opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

“A sealing order may issue only upon a request that establishes that the document,

or portions thereof, is privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 731 Filed 04/25/07 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

protection under the law.” Civil L.R. 79-5(a). “The request must be narrowly tailored to

seek sealing only of sealable material.” Id.

Having reviewed the Declaration of Randall T. Garteiser, filed April 21, 2007, offered

in support of the instant motion, the Court finds good cause exists to GRANT the motion in

part, specifically, to the extent it pertains to the three documents identified below. 

Accordingly, the Clerk is hereby DIRECTED to file under seal unredacted versions of the

following three documents:

1. Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Jeffrey Bokor in Support of Defendants’ Opposition

to Matsushita’s Motion for Summary Judgment;

2. Exhibit 2 to the Rebuttal Report of Jeffrey Bokor Submitted as Exhibit 1 to the

Declaration of Jeffrey Bokor in Support of Defendants’ Opposition to Matsushita’s Motion

for Summary Judgment; and 

3. Exhibits 9-13 to the Rebuttal Report of Jeffrey Bokor Submitted as Exhibit 1 to

the Declaration of Jeffrey Bokor in Support of Defendants’ Opposition to Matsushita’s

Motion for Summary Judgment.

To the extent defendants’ motion requests leave to file under seal redacted versions

of documents that contain material designated as confidential by plaintiff, specifically,

(1) defendants’ opposition to plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, (2) Declaration of Dr.

Robert G. Wedig, and (3) Exhibits D, H-I, and L-P to the Declaration of Charlie Y. Chou, the

Court hereby DEFERS ruling on said motion until after April 27, 2007, the date by which

plaintiff is required to submit a declaration establishing that such documents, either in their

entirety or in part, are sealable. See Civil L.R. 79-5(d).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 25, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 731 Filed 04/25/07 Page 2 of 2