Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04525/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04525-40/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AVAGO TECHNOLOGIES GENERAL IP 

(SINGAPORE) PTE LTD.,,

Plaintiff,

v.

ASUSTEK COMPUTER, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04525-EMC 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE 

UNDER SEAL

Docket No. 304

Currently pending before the Court is ASUS’s motion to file under seal. ASUS has moved 

to file under seal because certain information has been designated by Avago or a third party as 

confidential. According to ASUS, it has given notice to both Avago and the relevant third parties 

so that they may assert a claim of confidentiality, as necessary. Only Avago has submitted a 

declaration supporting a filing under seal, but Avago does not claim confidentiality as to all of the 

information that ASUS identified in its motion. 

The Court has reviewed Avago’s declaration and finds that it justifies a filing under seal 

with respect to the portions identified by Avago. As to these portions identified by Avago, the 

motion to file under seal is GRANTED.

As to the remaining portions, however, sealing is not appropriate as no party or third party 

has asserted a claim of confidentiality. Thus, to this extent, the motion to file under seal is

DENIED.

///

///

///

Case 3:15-cv-04525-EMC Document 354 Filed 11/03/16 Page 1 of 2
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

For the Northern District of California

The Court orders ASUS to re-file (publicly) its opposition brief so that only those portions 

identified by Avago in its declaration are redacted. ASUS shall re-file its opposition brief within 

three days of the date of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 3, 2016

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-04525-EMC Document 354 Filed 11/03/16 Page 2 of 2