Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02123/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02123-78/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THERASENSE, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY,

Defendant. /

AND CONSOLIDATED CASES. 

 /

No. C 04-02123 WHA

Consolidated with

No. C 04-03327 WHA

No. C 04-03732 WHA

No. C 05-03117 WHA

ORDER RE PENDING

MOTIONS TO SEAL

Good cause shown, the motion to seal Exhibit H to the declaration of Shannon H.

Hutchenson in support of plaintiffs’ response to Bayer’s motion in limine No. 1 and the motion

to seal Exhibit N to the declaration of Shannon H. Hutchenson in support of plaintiffs’ response

to Roche’s motion to sever are GRANTED. This does not mean, however, that the courtroom

will be sealed if these documents are presented as evidence at trial. It will not. Good cause not

shown, all other documents will not be sealed and should be resubmitted, including Exhibit C to

the declaration of Shannon Hutchenson in support of plaintitffs’ response to Roche’s motion in

limine No. 2. The Lifescan agreement is quoted extensively in the Court’s omnibus order and is

too critical a document to be filed under seal. 

Dated: May 22, 2008. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-02123-WHA Document 766 Filed 05/22/08 Page 1 of 1