Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02919/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02919-25/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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

NORTEK AIR SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

DMG CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-02919-BLF 

ORDER REGARDING SEALING 

MOTIONS PERTAINING TO MOTIONS 

IN LIMINE

[Re: ECF 224, 240, 251, 253, 254]

Before the Court are the parties’ administrative motions to file under seal portions of their 

briefing and exhibits in connection with the parties’ motions in limine. ECF 224, 240, 251, 253, 

254. For the reasons stated below, the motions are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN 

PART

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 and Cnty. 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)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are 

“more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of 

“compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 

1101–02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed 

upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097. 

In addition, sealing motions filed in this district must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing 

only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). A party moving to seal a document in whole or in 

part must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 1 of 8
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

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.” Id. 

II. DISCUSSION

The Court has reviewed the parties’ sealing motions and respective declarations in support 

thereof. The Court finds the parties have articulated compelling reasons to seal certain portions of 

most of the submitted documents. The proposed redactions are also narrowly tailored. The 

Court’s rulings on the sealing request are set forth in the tables below:

A. ECF 224

Identification of 

Documents to be Sealed

Description of Documents Court’s Order

MIL No. 1. Redacted at 

pgs.: 1:17, 21; 2:26-27, 

28; 3:1-4, 5-6, 8, 13, 15-

16, 17, 17-18, 22-23; 

3:24-4:2; 4:7-8, 10-11, 

12-13, 14-15, 21-22; 5:7-

8, 10, 11-12, 13.

Nortek confirms Defendants’ request to seal the 

redactions to Motion in Limine No. 1 as to 1:17, 

3:8, 13, 15-18, 22-25, 4:1-2, 7-8, 10-11. Nortek 

has additionally proposed redactions to 4:7-17.

This language proposed for redaction contains 

confidential information about customer demand, 

pricing, and internal market surveys.

GRANTED as to 

1:17, 3:8, 13, 15-

18, 22-25, 4:1-2, 

7-8, 10-11, and 

4:7-17 and 

DENIED as to 

remainder.

MIL No. 2. Redacted at 

pgs.: 3:4-5, 7-8, 8-11, 14-

16, 17-19; 5:15-16, 17-

18, 18-19, 19-20.

Nortek confirms Defendants’ request to seal the 

redactions to Motion in Limine No. 2 as to 3:7-11. 

The language proposed for redaction contains 

confidential excerpts from the deposition of Dr. 

Prowse explaining confidential information about 

customer demand.

GRANTED as to 

3:7-11 and 

DENIED as to 

remainder.

MIL No. 3. Redacted at 

pgs.: 2:21-22; 4:2, 3, 13-

14, 14-15, 22-23, and 23-

24.

Nortek does not object to Motion in Limine No. 3 

being filed publically.

DENIED

MIL No. 4. Redacted at 

pgs.: 2:23-25, 26-27, 28; 

3:1-4, 10-11, 24-27; 3:28-

4:2; 4:18-19, 21-22; 5:4, 

8, 9-10.

Nortek does not object to Motion in Limine No. 4 

being filed publically.

DENIED

Exhibits 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 

to MIL No. 1

Confidential internal Nortek analysis that divulges 

internal, competitive-analysis and technical 

information regarding features included in various 

projects

GRANTED

Exhibits 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10

to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential business information 

detailing Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, and 

technical documents detailing design, components, 

and technical features of specific Nortek products 

and its customers’ facilities including sensitive 

details regarding customer pricing 

GRANTED

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 2 of 8
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

Exhibit 13 to MIL No. 1 Contains confidential business information 

detailing both Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, 

and products.

GRANTED

Exhibits 14, 15, 16, and 

17 to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential business information 

detailing Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, and 

competition including sensitive details regarding 

customer pricing.

GRANTED

Exhibit 18 to MIL No. 1 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 18 being filed 

publically.

Defendants’ Confidential Information (or that of 

its customers) redacted at: 18 (technical 

information); 13- 17, 18 (customer information).

GRANTED as to 

18 and 13-17, 18 

and DENIED as 

to remainder.

Exhibit 1 to MIL No. 2 Contains confidential business information 

detailing Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, and 

technical documents detailing design, components, 

and technical features of specific Nortek products 

and their customers’ facilities including sensitive 

details regarding customer pricing

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to MIL No. 2 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 2 being filed 

publically.

Defendants’ Confidential Information (or that of 

its

customers) redacted at: 22 (financial information).

GRANTED as to 

22 and DENIED 

as to remainder.

Exhibit 3 to MIL No. 2 Contains confidential business information 

detailing Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, and 

technical documents detailing design, components, 

and technical features of specific Nortek products 

and their customers’ facilities including sensitive 

details regarding customer pricing

GRANTED

Exhibit 5 to MIL No. 2 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 5 being filed 

publically.

Defendants’ Confidential Information (or that of 

its customers) redacted at: 18, (technical 

information); 13-17, 18 (customer information).

GRANTED as to 

13-17, and 18 

and DENIED as 

to remainder.

Exhibit 1 to MIL No. 3 Contains confidential business information 

detailing Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, and 

technical documents detailing design, components, 

and technical features of specific Nortek products 

and their customers’ facilities including sensitive 

details regarding customer pricing

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to MIL No. 3 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 2 being filed 

publically.

DENIED

Exhibit 3 to MIL No. 3 Contains confidential business information 

detailing design, components, internal business 

analysis, and technical features of specific Nortek 

products.

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Motion in 

Limine No. 4

Nortek does not object to Exhibit 1 being filed 

publically. 

GRANTED as to 

13 and 14, and 

Exhibit 1 at 2-8, 

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 3 of 8
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

Defendants’ Confidential Information (or that of 

its customers) redacted at: Pgs. 13 and 14, and 

Exhibit 1, Pgs. 2-8 (technical information);

Exhibit 1, pg. 2 (customer information)

and DENIED as 

to remainder.

Exhibit 2 to MIL No. 4 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 2 being filed 

publically.

DENIED

Exhibit 3 to MIL No. 4 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 3 being filed 

publically.

DENIED

Exhibit 4 to MIL No. 4 Contains confidential business information 

detailing Nortek’s economic analysis, pricing, and 

technical documents detailing design, components, 

and technical features of specific Nortek products 

and their customers’ facilities including sensitive 

details regarding customer pricing

GRANTED

Exhibit 5 to MIL No. 4 Nortek does not object to Exhibit 5 being filed 

publically.

DENIED

B. ECF 240

Identification of 

Documents to be Sealed

Description of Documents Court’s Order

Opp. to Nortek’s MIL 

No. 3

Nortek does not object to this document being 

filed publically.

Defendants’ Confidential Customer Information 

Redacted at pgs.: 3:3.

GRANTED as 

to 3:3 and 

DENIED as to 

remainder.

Opp. to Nortek’s MIL 

No. 4

Contains confidential information about business 

acquisitions, damages, pricing, and internal 

business strategy. Nortek has additionally 

proposed redactions to 1:7-16, 17-22, 24-27, 2:1-4, 

12-20, 26-28, 3:1, 10-11, 12- 14, 19-22, 23-25, and 

4:23-24 as containing confidential information.

GRANTED

Opp. to Nortek’s MIL 

No. 5

Contains confidential information about damages 

and litigation practices. Nortek has additionally 

proposed redactions to 2:8 and 5:3 as containing 

confidential information.

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 1

Contains confidential business information 

detailing technical features of specific Nortek 

products and brands, and their customers’ 

facilities.

Defendants’ redactions are narrowly tailored and 

limited to portions containing confidential Energy 

Labs technical information or private third party 

information.

GRANTED

Exhibit 3 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 1

Confidential business information detailing 

revenue

GRANTED

Exhibit 8 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 1

Contains confidential excerpts from technical 

documents detailing the design, components, and 

technical features of specific Energy Labs airhandling unit; information regarding its customers’ 

facilities, and confidential competitive analyses.

GRANTED

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 4 of 8
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

Exhibit 1 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 2

Contains confidential business information 

detailing technical features of specific Nortek 

products and brands, and their customers’ 

facilities.

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 2

Nortek does not object to this document being 

filed publically.

DENIED

Exhibit 3 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 2

Confidential technical information concerning 

Nortek products and systems.

GRANTED

Exhibit 4 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 2

Confidential technical information concerning 

Nortek products and systems.

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 3

Confidential technical information concerning 

Nortek products.

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 3

Nortek does not object to this document being 

filed publically.

DENIED

Exhibit 1 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 4

Confidential internal Nortek business and pricing 

analysis, along with damages calculations, that 

would harm Nortek’s business if publically filed

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 4

Confidential internal strategy memorandum for 

Nortek and its internal brands.

GRANTED

Exhibit 4 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 4

Confidential financial information belonging to

Nortek

GRANTED

Exhibit 4: Exhibit 13 to 

Opp. to Nortek’s MIL 

No. 4

Confidential internal Nortek analysis that divulges 

internal, competitive-analysis and business 

agreement information

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 5

Nortek does not object to this document being 

filed publically.

DENIED

Exhibit 6 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 5

Confidential internal Nortek business and pricing 

analysis

GRANTED

Exhibit 7 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 5

Confidential internal Nortek business and pricing 

analysis that would harm Nortek’s business if 

publically filed

GRANTED

Exhibit 8 to Opp. to 

Nortek’s MIL No. 5

Confidential consulting agreement GRANTED

C. ECF 251, 253, 254

Identification of 

Documents to be Sealed

Description of Documents Court’s Order

Nortek’s Opp. to MIL 

No. 1

Contains Nortek’s confidential pricing 

information.

Defendants’ confidential information is not 

implicated at 4:13-18.

GRANTED as to 

Nortek’s 

confidential 

information and 

DENIED as to 

4:13-18.

Nortek’s Opp. to MIL 

No. 2

Contains Nortek’s confidential business 

agreements.

Defendants’ confidential information redacted at: 

2:1-2 (technical specifications); 2:8-14, 2:22-23, 

2:25-27 (damages); 5:6-8, 5:9, 5:10, 5:13, 5:18 

(business structure).

GRANTED

Nortek’s Opp. to MIL 

No. 3

Contains Nortek’s confidential business 

information and communications.

GRANTED

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 5 of 8
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

Defendants’ confidential information redacted at: 

1:23-2:2, 2:7-9, 2:12-14, 2:20-23, 4:18-23 

(business information).

Nortek’s Opp. to MIL 

No. 4

Contains confidential technical information about 

Temtrol System.

Defendants’ confidential information is not 

implicated at: 1:26-2:1, 2:2-5, 2:6-8 (technical 

information); 2:9-10 (design information), 2:13, 

2:17 (technical information); 4:12-15, 4:18-20, 

4:23-24, 5:15 (design information).

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Confidential information about Nortek’s

business practices and pricing

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Confidential information about Nortek’s 

competition and pricing information

GRANTED

Exhibit 3 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Concerning confidential information about 

Nortek’s business practices, competitive pricing

GRANTED

Exhibit 4 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Concerning confidential information about 

Temtrol System, Nortek’s business practices, 

competitive pricing and market strategy, brand 

management, and product analysis

GRANTED

Exhibit 5 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Confidential information about business 

agreements, Nortek products information and 

technology analysis.

GRANTED

Exhibit 7 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential discussion regarding the 

product design, components, and technical features 

of Energy Labs products and specific customers’ 

air-handling units and facilities, and private third 

party customer information

GRANTED

Exhibit 8 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential discussion regarding the 

product design, components, and technical features 

of Energy Labs products and specific customers’ 

air-handling units and facilities, and private third 

party customer information

GRANTED

Exhibit 9 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Proprietary information about Nortek’s 

competitive analysis, product analysis and 

business strategy

GRANTED

Exhibit 11 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential business information about 

Temtrol, Nortek’s pricing structure, and customer

Information

GRANTED

Exhibit 12 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential discussion regarding the

product design, components, and technical features 

of Energy Labs products and specific customers’ 

air-handling units and facilities, and private third 

party customer information

GRANTED

Exhibit 14 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 1

Contains confidential discussion regarding the 

design and technical features of Energy Labs 

products and specific customers’ air-handling units 

GRANTED

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 6 of 8
7

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

and facilities, and private third party customer

information

Exhibit 3 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential business agreements GRANTED

Exhibit 4 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential discussion regarding the 

business operations and sales compositions for

Defendants

GRANTED

Exhibit 5 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential information regarding 

Defendants financial and sales information, and 

private third party information regarding 

Defendants’ customers

GRANTED

Exhibit 6 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential information about

Nortek’s business agreements

GRANTED

Exhibit 7 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential information about

Nortek’s business agreements

GRANTED

Exhibit 8 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential information regarding 

Defendants financial and sales information, and 

private third party information regarding 

Defendants’ customers

GRANTED

Exhibit 11 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential information regarding 

Defendants financial and sales information, 

employee compensation, and technical details 

regarding specific customer’s AHU installations

GRANTED

Exhibit 12 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 2

Contains confidential information regarding 

Defendants business methods and processes, and 

technical details regarding Defendants’ product 

offerings

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Proprietary information about Nortek’s products,

including their development

GRANTED

Exhibit 5 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Contains confidential discussion regarding 

development of Defendants’ products

GRANTED

Exhibit 6 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Contains confidential information about Nortek’s 

intellectual property in communication with 

Energy Labs

GRANTED

Exhibit 7 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Contains confidential discussion regarding 

development of Defendants’ products

GRANTED

Exhibit 9 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Confidential internal analysis reflecting detailed 

technical information regarding a specific 

customer’s air handling unit and installation

GRANTED

Exhibit 10 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Confidential internal technology and product 

analysis reflecting Energy Labs’ investment of 

financial and technical resources

GRANTED

Exhibit 11 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Confidential information about Energy Labs’ 

business plans, financial information, and 

competitive analysis

GRANTED

Exhibit 14 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Contains confidential information about

Nortek’s technical specifications

GRANTED

Exhibit 15 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Contains confidential information about

Nortek’s technical specifications

GRANTED

Exhibit 19 to Nortek’s Confidential internal technology and product GRANTED

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 7 of 8
8

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

Opp. to MIL No. 3 analysis reflecting Energy Labs’ investment of 

financial and technical resources

Exhibit 20 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 3

Confidential discussion regarding Defendants’

products, confidential discussion regarding 

Defendants’ product design, and information

regarding Defendants’ customers

GRANTED

Exhibit 1 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 4

Confidential discussion regarding the design,

components, and technical features of specific

Energy Labs air-handling unit and its customers’

facilities, and private third party customer 

information, including the components used in and 

structure of customers

GRANTED

Exhibit 2 to Nortek’s 

Opp. to MIL No. 4

Proprietary information about Nortek’s products 

and Temtrol System

GRANTED

III. ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the sealing motions at ECF 224, 240, 251, 253, 254 are 

GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Under Civil Local Rule 79-5(e)(2), for any 

request that has been denied because the party designating a document as confidential or subject to 

a protective order has not provided sufficient reasons to seal, the submitting party must file the 

unredacted (or lesser redacted) documents into the public record no earlier than 4 days and no later 

than 10 days form the filing of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 18, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02919-BLF Document 360 Filed 08/18/16 Page 8 of 8