Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04374/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04374-41/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

CELERITY, INC.,

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant

 v.

ULTRA CLEAN TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS

AND SERVICE, INC.

Defendant/Counterclaimant

and

ULTRA CLEAN HOLDINGS, INC.

Defendant /

No. C-05-4374 MMC

(Consolidated with C-05-3560 MMC)

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION FOR LEAVE

TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;

DIRECTIONS TO CLERK

Before the Court is defendants’ motion, filed May 15, 2007, for leave to file under

seal certain documents offered in connection with defendants’ opposition to plaintiff’s

motions in limine.

Good cause appearing from the Declaration of Lisa Kobialka, the motion is hereby

GRANTED, and the Clerk is hereby directed to file under seal unredacted versions of the

following documents:

1. Ultra Clean Technology Systems and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings,

Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in Limine No. 1;

2. Declaration of Sean M. Boyle in Support of Ultra Clean Technology Systems and

Case 3:05-cv-04374-MMC Document 341 Filed 05/17/07 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

Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in

Limine No. 1;

3. Ultra Clean Technology Systems and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings,

Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in Limine No. 2;

4. Declaration of James R. Hannah in Support of Ultra Clean Technology Systems

and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in

Limine No. 2;

5. Ultra Clean Technology Systems and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings,

Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in Limine No. 3;

6. Declaration of James R. Hannah in Support of Ultra Clean Technology Systems

and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in

Limine No. 3;

7. Ultra Clean Technology Systems and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings,

Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in Limine No. 5;

8. Declaration of Amy Sun in Support of Ultra Clean Technology Systems and

Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in

Limine No. 5;

9. Declaration of Sean M. Boyle in Support of Ultra Clean Technology Systems and

Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in

Limine No. 7;

10. Ultra Clean Technology Systems and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings,

Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in Limine No. 10; and

11. Declaration of James R. Hannah in Support of Ultra Clean Technology Systems

and Service, Inc.’s and Ultra Clean Holdings, Inc.’s Opposition to Celerity, Inc.’s Motion in

Limine No. 10.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 17, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-04374-MMC Document 341 Filed 05/17/07 Page 2 of 2