Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_19-mc-80272/USCOURTS-cand-5_19-mc-80272-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case

---

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

[PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

Arpita Bhattacharyya (SBN 316454) 

arpita.bhattacharyya@finnegan.com 

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

 GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP

Stanford Research Park 

3300 Hillview Avenue 

Palo Alto, CA 94304-1203 

Telephone: (650) 849-6600 

Facsimile: (650) 849-6666 

Lionel M. Lavenue (pro hac vice) 

lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com 

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

 GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP

Two Freedom Square 

11955 Freedom Drive 

Reston, VA 20190-5675 

Telephone: (571) 203-2750 

Facsimile: (571) 203-2777 

R. Benjamin Cassady (pro hac vice) 

ben.cassady@finnegan.com 

FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

 GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP

901 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20001-4413 

Telephone: (202) 408-6088 

Facsimile: (202) 408-4400 

Attorneys for Petitioners 

BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG and 

BMW BANK GMBH

Jason S. Angell 

jangell@hopkinscarley.com 

HOPKINS & CARLEY 

200 Page Mill Road 

Suite 200 

Palo Alto, CA 94306 

Telephone: (650) 804.7600 

Peter E. Nissly 

pnissly@hopkinscarley.com 

HOPKINS & CARLEY 

70 S 1st St 

San Jose, CA 95113 

Telephone: (408) 286-9800 

Attorneys for 

BROADCOM CORPORATION. BROADCOM, 

INC. AND BROADCOM TECHNOLOGIES, 

INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

In Re Ex Parte Application of 

BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG 

and BMW BANK GMBH 

Applicants, 

for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 

1782 Granting Leave to Obtain Discovery 

for Use in Foreign Proceeding,

Case No. 5:19-mc-80272-VKD 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND 

PROTECTIVE ORDER 

Re: Dkt. No. 18 MODIFIED BY THE COURT

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 1 of 24
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

1 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

[PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

In order to expedite the flow of discovery materials, facilitate the prompt resolution of 

disputes over confidentiality, adequately protect confidential materials, and ensure that protection is 

afforded only to material so entitled, and for good cause shown, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c), it 

is hereby ORDERED THAT: 

1. PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS 

1.1 Protected Material designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” under the terms of this Protective Order shall be 

used by a Receiving Party solely for (i) the above-captioned case and all related appeals or (ii) the 

Actions and all related appeals, or (iii) invalidity or nullity actions and all related appeals regarding 

the Patents at issue in the Actions, and shall not be used directly or indirectly for any other purpose 

whatsoever, except as expressly provided for herein and/or agreed to by the Producing Party. 

1.2 Nothing in this Protective Order shall be construed to require a Producing Party to 

produce or disclose information not otherwise required to be produced under the applicable rules or 

orders of the Court. Production or disclosure of “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information under this Protective Order shall 

not prejudice the right of any Producing Party making that production or disclosure to maintain the 

trade secret status or confidentiality of that information in other contexts. Similarly, no Producing 

Party waives any right to object on any ground to the admissibility of any of the Discovery Material, 

or portion thereof, covered by this Protective Order. Likewise, nothing in this Protective Order shall 

prejudice the right of any Receiving Party to challenge the confidentiality designation of any 

materials produced and designated under this Protective Order. 

1.3 Disclosure and discovery activity in the above-captioned case may involve production 

of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 

disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. 

The parties acknowledge that this Protective Order does not confer blanket protections on all 

disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public disclosure and use 

extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 2 of 24
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 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

applicable legal principles. Accordingly, the Parties hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to 

enter this Protective Order. 

2. DEFINITIONS 

2.1 Actions: 2.1 Avago Techs. Int’l Sales Pte. Ltd. v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, 

et al., No. 7 O 83/19 (filed on July 19, 2019 before the Mannheim Regional Court in Germany); 

Avago Techs. Int’l Sales Pte. Ltd. v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, et al., No. 327 O 272/19 (filed 

on August 2, 2019 before the Hamburg Regional Court in Germany); Broadcom Corp. v. Bayerische 

Motoren Werke AG, et al., No. 7 O 14/19 (filed on February 12, 2019 before the Mannheim 

Regional Court in Germany); and consequent appeals before the Court of Appeal and Federal Court 

of Justice, and any other German infringement or nullity actions filed by BMW in which the 

infringement or validity of EP 1 316 181, EP 1 931 052, and/or EP 1 177 531 is at issue. 

2.2 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is 

generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of 

Civil Procedure 26(c). A Producing Party may designate any Discovery Material as 

“CONFIDENTIAL” if it contains or reflects confidential, proprietary, and/or commercially sensitive 

information. 

2.3 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel of Record and House Counsel (as well 

as their support staff). 

2.4 Designating Party: a Party that designates information or items that it produces in 

disclosures or in responses to discovery as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.”

2.5 Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner in 

which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, 

and tangible things), that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this 

matter. 

2.6 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to 

the litigation who has been retained by a Party or its Outside Counsel of Record to serve as an expert 

witness or a litigation consultant in the Actions (including any necessary support personnel of such 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 3 of 24
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

3 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

person to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation or the Actions), and who is not 

a current employee of a Party or of a competitor of a Party, and who, at the time of retention, is not 

anticipated to become an employee of a Party or of a competitor of a Party. 

2.7 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” Information or Items: 

Discovery Material that contains or reflects information that is extremely confidential and/or 

sensitive in nature and the Producing Party reasonably believes that the disclosure of such Discovery 

Material is likely to cause economic harm or significant competitive disadvantage to the Producing 

Party. The Parties agree that the following information, if non-public, shall be presumed to merit the 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” designation: trade secrets, pricing 

information, financial data, sales or marketing forecasts or plans, business plans, sales or marketing 

strategy, product development information, engineering documents, testing documents, employee 

information, and other non-public information of similar competitive and business sensitivity. 

2.8 House Counsel: attorneys (as well as their support staff) who are employees of the 

Receiving Party and who have responsibility for managing the above-captioned case or the Actions. 

House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 

2.9 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal 

entity not named as a Party to the above-captioned case or the Actions. 

2.10 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a Party but are 

retained to represent or advise a Party in connection with the above-captioned case or the Actions, as 

well as other attorneys or support staff employed by or affiliated with the same firm as one of the 

attorneys who has entered an appearance on behalf of one of the Parties in the above-captioned case 

or the Actions, to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for the abovecaptioned case or the Actions. 

2.11 Party or Parties: Broadcom Corporation; Broadcom, Inc.; Broadcom Technologies, 

Inc.; Avago Technologies Ltd; Avago Tech (collectively “Broadcom”); Bayerische Motoren Werke 

AG; and BMW Bank GmbH (collectively “BMW”), including all of their officers, directors, 

employees, consultants, retained experts, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 4 of 24
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

4 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

2.12 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Discovery Material pursuant to 

this protective order. 

2.13 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services 

(e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, 

storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors. For the 

avoidance of doubt, Professional Vendors does not include professional jury or trial consultants or 

mock jurors. 

2.14 Protected Material: any Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL”

or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” as provided for in this Protective 

Order. 

2.15 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Discovery Material from a Producing Party. 

2.16 Relevant Technology: technology related to (a) graphics display systems for 

processing and displaying video graphics; (b) bridge circuits in network devices; (c) computer 

graphics systems for processing textures for a graphic image on a computer display; (d) systems for 

providing layered graphics in a video environment; (e) systems for processing textures for a 

graphical image; (f) systems for processing signals received via a communication medium, in 

particular, for sharing low noise amplifier (LNA) circuitry; and (g) systems operable to perform 

energy detection and auto wire pair selection within a communication device. 

3. SCOPE 

3.1 The protections conferred by this Protective Order cover not only Protected Material 

(as defined above), but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all 

copies, excerpts, summaries, derivations or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any 

testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected 

Material. 

3.2 Nothing in this Protective Order shall prevent or restrict a Producing Party’s own 

disclosure or use of its own Protected Material for any purpose, and nothing in this Protective Order 

shall preclude any Producing Party from showing its Protected Material to an individual who 

prepared the Protected Material. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Producing Party may not disclose 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 5 of 24
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

5 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

its own Protected Material to the extent such Protected Material is also the Protected Material of any 

other Party (e.g., settlement discussions and agreements containing confidentiality obligations), 

without the prior written consent of such other party, unless compelled to do so by a Court of 

competent jurisdiction. 

3.3 Nothing in this Protective Order shall restrict in any way the use or disclosure of 

Discovery Material by a Receiving Party that is: (i) in the public domain at the time of disclosure to 

a Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a 

result of publication not involving a violation of this Protective Order, including becoming part of 

the public record through trial or otherwise; (ii) known to the Receiving Party prior to the disclosure 

or obtained by the Receiving Party after the disclosure from a source who obtained the information 

lawfully and under no obligation of confidentiality to the Designating Party; (iii) previously 

produced, disclosed and/or provided by the Designating Party to the Receiving Party or a Non-Party 

without an obligation of confidentiality and not by inadvertence or mistake; (iv) with the consent of 

the Designating Party; or (v) pursuant to order of the Court. 

3.4 Nothing in this Protective Order shall restrict a Producing Party’s use or disclosure of 

Discovery Material it produces that is designated as Protected Material by another Party or NonParty, if it was previously disclosed, produced, or provided by the Designating Party to the 

Producing Party. 

3.5 Nothing in this Protective Order shall be construed to preclude any Party’s right to 

seek to file any Protected Material with the Court under seal. This Protective Order is without 

prejudice to the right of any Party to seek further or additional protection of any Discovery Material 

or to modify this Protective Order in any way, including, without limitation, an order that certain 

matter not be produced at all. 

4. DURATION 

4.1 Even after final disposition of the Actions, the confidentiality obligations imposed by 

this Protective Order shall remain in effect until a Designating Party agrees otherwise in writing, a 

court order otherwise directs, or that information otherwise becomes public. Final disposition occurs 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 6 of 24
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

6 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

after an order, mandate, or dismissal finally terminating the Actions with prejudice, including all 

appeals. 

5. DESIGNATING PROTECTED MATERIAL 

5.1 Exercise of Restraint and Care in Designating Material for Protection. Each Party or 

Non-Party that designates information or items for protection under this Order must take care to 

limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies under the appropriate standards. To the 

extent it is practical to do so, the Designating Party must designate for protection only those parts of 

material, documents, items, or oral or written communications that qualify – so that other portions of 

the material, documents, items, or communications for which protection is not warranted are not 

swept unjustifiably within the ambit of this Order. 

Mass, indiscriminate, or routinized designations are prohibited. Designations that are shown 

to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to unnecessarily 

encumber or retard the case development process or to impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on 

other parties) expose the Designating Party to sanctions. 

5.2 Manner and Timing of Designations. The Producing Party may designate Discovery 

Material with any of the following designations, provided that it meets the requirements for such 

designations as provided for herein: “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” Except as otherwise provided in this Protective Order, or as 

otherwise stipulated or ordered, Discovery Material that qualifies for protection under this Protective 

Order must be clearly so designated before the material is disclosed or produced. Designation in 

conformity with this Protective Order requires: 

For information in documentary form (e.g., paper or electronically stored 

information (“ESI”), but excluding transcripts of depositions or other pretrial or trial 

proceedings), that the Producing Party affix the legend “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” to each page that contains protected 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 7 of 24
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

7 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

material and also, for ESI, in the metadata field assigned to indicate the confidentiality 

designation.1

A Party that makes original documents or materials available for inspection 

need not designate them for protection until after the inspecting Party has indicated which 

material it would like copied and produced. During the inspection and before the 

designation, all of the material made available for inspection shall be deemed “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” After the inspecting Party has 

identified the documents it wants copied and produced, the Producing Party must determine 

which documents qualify for protection under this Protective Order. Then, before producing 

the specified documents, the Producing Party must affix the appropriate legend 

(“CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”) as 

set forth in the preceding paragraph. 

For electronic files and documents produced in native electronic format, that 

the Producing Party append to the file names or designators information indicating whether 

the files contains “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ 

EYES ONLY” material, or shall use any other reasonable method for so designating 

Protected Materials produced in electronic format. When electronic files or documents are 

printed for use at deposition, in a court proceeding, or for provision in printed form to an 

Expert, the party printing the electronic files or documents shall affix a legend to the printed 

document corresponding to the designation of the Designating Party and including the 

production number and designation associated with the native file. 

Each Party shall give the other Party notice if it reasonably expects a hearing 

or other proceeding to include the other Party’s Protected Material so that the other Party can 

ensure that only authorized individuals are present at those proceedings. 

For all other information or tangible items, that the Producing Party affix in a 

prominent place on the exterior of the container or containers in which the information or 

1

 This protective order does not account for the provision of any source code, and the Parties 

agree that, to the extent production of source code is appropriate and required, a supplemental 

protective order with additional disclosure protections and procedures will be necessary. 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 8 of 24
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

8 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

item is stored the label “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – 

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” 

5.3 Inadvertent Failures to Designate. If timely corrected, an inadvertent failure to 

designate qualified information or items does not, standing alone, waive the Designating Party’s 

right to secure protection under this Protective Order for such material. Upon timely correction of a 

designation, the Receiving Party must make reasonable efforts to assure that the material is treated in 

accordance with the provisions of this Protective Order. Following a correction of a designation, the 

Producing Party shall provide re-labeled copies of the information or items to each Receiving Party 

reflecting the change in designation. 

6. ACCESS TO AND USE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL 

6.1 Basic Principles. All Protected Material shall be used solely for the above-captioned 

case and the Actions, and not for any other purpose whatsoever, including without limitation any 

other litigation, patent prosecution or acquisition, patent reexamination or reissue proceedings, or 

any business or competitive purpose or function. Protected Material shall not be distributed, 

disclosed or made available to anyone except as expressly provided in this Protective Order or 

another Order of this Court. When the Actions have been terminated, the Receiving Party must 

comply with the provisions of Sections 4.1, 11.5 and 12 herein.

6.2 Duty to Object to Third Party Effort to Access in the Actions. After and to the extent 

a Receiving Party receives notice that a third party to the Actions is attempting to access Protected 

Material in the Actions, the Receiving Party will object to any attempt by a third party to access any 

Protected Material submitted to the court in any Actions. After receiving notice, a Receiving Party 

will promptly notify the Designating Party and its counsel of any attempt by a third party to the 

Actions to access any such Protected Material from those proceedings, or of any attempt by any third 

party to intervene in the Actions, in sufficient time to allow the Designating Party to object, with the 

Receiving Party’s assistance and the cooperation of the parties in the proceeding, and to have such 

objection timely resolved by the German court to ensure adequate protections remain in place. 

6.3 Secure Storage, No Export. Broadcom believes that certain Privileged Material may 

be subject to U.S. government export control and economic sanctions laws. To the extent required 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 9 of 24
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

9 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

by such regulations or laws, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, Protected 

Material must be stored and maintained by a Receiving Party at a location in the United States and in 

a secure manner that ensures that access is limited to the persons authorized under this Order. If 

Broadcom believes that any Discovery Materials may be subject to such export restrictions, 

Broadcom shall provide notice in writing to the Receiving Party and shall identify such materials by 

production number and shall specify the legal and factual basis for such a belief, and respond in 

good faith to any inquiries regarding such a belief. The Receiving Party shall be responsible for 

ensuring compliance with all applicable U.S. export control and economic sanction laws. After a 

good faith attempt to resolve any dispute regarding such a belief, the Receiving Party may challenge 

a designation of Discovery Materials as being subject to export restrictions under the procedures 

described in Section 10 of this Protective Order. 

6.4 Disclosure of “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items. Unless otherwise ordered 

by the Court or permitted in writing by the Designating Party, a Receiving Party may disclose any 

information or items designated “CONFIDENTIAL” only to: 

the Receiving Party’s Outside Counsel of Record in the above-captioned case 

or Outside Counsel of Record in the Actions who have signed the “Acknowledgment and 

Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), as well as employees of said Outside Counsel of 

Record in the above-captioned case or Outside Counsel of Record in the Actions, and any 

copying or clerical litigation support services working at the direction of such Outside 

Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the information for this 

litigation or the Actions; 

Three (3) or fewer House Counsel identified in accordance with Section 6.6 

below prior to any disclosure, (1) to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this 

litigation or the Actions, (2) who are not involved in competitive decision-making as defined 

by U.S. Steel v. United States, 730 F.2d 1465, 1468 n.3 (Fed. Cir. 1984), on behalf of a Party 

or a competitor of a Party, (3) who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be 

Bound” (Exhibit A), as well as their support staff to whom disclosure is reasonably 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 10 of 24
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

10 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

necessary, provided that such support staff are not involved in competitive decision-making 

and have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A); 

Experts (as defined in this Protective Order) retained by the Receiving Party 

to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this litigation provided that (1) such Expert 

has signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A); (2) such Expert 

has no involvement in competitive decision-making (as defined by U.S. Steel v. United 

States, 730 F.2d 1465, 1468 n.3 (Fed. Cir. 1984)) for the Receiving Party; and (3) no 

unresolved objections to such disclosure exist after proper notice has been given to all Parties 

as set forth in Section 6.6; 

Professional Vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this 

litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit 

A); 

the Court in the above-captioned case and the Actions and their respective 

personnel; 

court reporters and their staff to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for 

this litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” 

(Exhibit A); 

the Designating Party or its employees, the author or recipient of a document 

containing the information, or a custodian or other person who otherwise possessed or knew 

the information; and 

any other person with the prior written consent of the Designating Party. 

6.5 Disclosure of “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”

Information or Items. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court or permitted in writing by the 

Designating Party, a Receiving Party may disclose any information or item designated “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” only to: 

the Receiving Party’s Outside Counsel of Record in the above-captioned case 

or Outside Counsel of Record in the Actions who have signed the “Acknowledgment and 

Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A), as well as employees of said Outside Counsel of 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 11 of 24
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

11 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

Record, and any copying or clerical litigation support services working at the direction of 

such Outside Counsel of Record to whom it is reasonably necessary to disclose the 

information for this litigation; 

Experts (as defined in this Protective Order) of the Receiving Party or its 

Outside Counsel of Record, retained to assist in the above-captioned case or the Actions, 

provided that disclosure is only to the extent necessary to perform such work; and provided 

that: (1) such Expert has agreed to be bound by the provisions of the Protective Order by 

signing a copy of “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A); (2) such 

Expert is not involved in competitive decision-making, as defined by U.S. Steel v. United 

States, 730 F.2d 1465, 1468 n.3 (Fed. Cir. 1984), on behalf of a Party or a competitor of a 

Party; and (3) no unresolved objections to such disclosure exist after proper notice has been 

given to all Parties as set forth in Section 6.6. 

Professional Vendors to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for this 

litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit 

A); 

the court in the above-captioned case and the Actions and their respective 

personnel; 

court reporters and their staff to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for 

this litigation and who have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” 

(Exhibit A); 

the Designating Party or its employees, the author or recipient of a document 

containing the information or a custodian or other person who otherwise possessed or knew 

the information; and 

any other person with the prior written consent of the Producing Party. 

6.6 Procedures for Approving or Objecting to Disclosure of Protected Material. 

Unless otherwise ordered by the Court or agreed to in writing by the 

Designating Party, prior to disclosing any Protected Material to any person described in 

Sections 6.4(b), 6.4(c), or 6.5(b) (referenced below as “Person”), the party seeking to 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 12 of 24
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

12 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

disclose such Protected Material first must make a written request to the Designating Party 

that: 

i. sets forth the full name of the Person and the city and state of his or 

her residence, and 

ii. states the present employer and the title of the Person; 

iii. for any Expert, includes (a) an up-to-date curriculum vitae of the 

Person (including the Person’s name and business/professional title and business 

address); (b) a list of other cases in which the Person has testified (at trial or 

deposition) within the last five (5) years; (c) a list of all companies by which the 

Person has been employed within the last four (4) years, the dates of the employment, 

and a brief description of the subject matter of the employment; and (d) a list of all 

companies with which the Person has consulted within the last four (4) years, the 

dates of the consultancy, and a brief description of the subject matter of the 

consultancy. This paragraph does not require the Disclosing Party to disclose aspects 

of any Expert’s business or profession or companies with which the proposed expert 

has consulted or by which the proposed expert has been employed to the extent such 

information is subject to a non-disclosure agreement or other legal or contractual 

confidentiality obligations by the expert to a third party; in any such instance, the 

Disclosing Party will describe the confidential information / experience in such a 

manner as to enable the other parties to determine whether any valid concerns exist 

regarding the Disclosing Party’s retention of that expert. 

Further, the Party seeking to disclose Protected Material shall provide such 

other information regarding the Person’s professional activities reasonably requested by the 

Producing Party for it to evaluate whether good cause exists to object to the disclosure of 

Protected Material to the Person. 

A Party that makes a request and provides the information specified in 

Sections 6.6(a) and 6.6(b) may disclose the subject Protected Material to the identified 

Person unless, within seven (7) days of delivering the request and providing all the 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 13 of 24
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

13 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

information required to be disclosed by this section, the Party receives a written objection 

from the Designating Party. Any such objection must be in writing and set forth good cause 

for the objection. For purposes of this section, “good cause” shall include an objectively 

reasonable concern that the Person will, advertently or inadvertently, use or disclose 

Protected Materials in a way or ways that are inconsistent with the provisions contained in 

this Protective Order. In the absence of an objection at the end of the seven (7) day period, 

the Person shall be deemed approved under this Protective Order. There shall be no 

disclosure of Protected Material to the Person prior to expiration of this seven (7) day period. 

A Party that receives a timely written objection must meet and confer with the 

Designating Party (through direct voice-to-voice dialogue; other forms of communication are 

not sufficient) to try to resolve the matter by agreement within seven (7) days of the written 

objection. If no agreement is reached, the Party seeking to make the disclosure to the Person 

may file a motion as provided in Civil Local Rule 7-1 (or otherwise according to the Court’s 

discovery dispute resolution procedures) seeking permission from the Court to do so. Any 

such motion must describe the circumstances with specificity, set forth in detail the reasons 

why the disclosure to the Person is reasonably necessary, assess the risk of harm that the 

disclosure would entail, and suggest any additional means that could be used to reduce that 

risk. In addition, any such motion must be accompanied by a competent declaration 

describing the Parties’ efforts to resolve the matter by agreement (i.e., the extent and the 

content of the meet and confer discussions) and setting forth the reasons advanced by the 

Designating Party for its refusal to approve the disclosure. 

In any such proceeding, the Party opposing disclosure to the Person shall bear 

the burden of proving that the risk of harm that the disclosure would entail (under the 

safeguards proposed) outweighs the Receiving Party’s need to disclose the Protected 

Material to the relevant Person. 

Upon receipt, a Receiving Party shall provide the Designating Party with a 

copy of each signed “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A) referenced 

herein. 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 14 of 24
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

14 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

6.7 Use of Protected Material. Any Protected Material may be introduced or submitted 

during one or more of the Actions only if the Receiving Party takes reasonable steps and makes all 

reasonable confidentiality requests to the court that are available under German procedural law to 

protect the confidentiality of such Protected Material, including: (a) in the case of written 

submissions, requesting that the German court exclude any Protected Materials from any third party 

access to the court files and to keep them separate from other submissions in the Actions; (b) in the 

case of written submissions, redacting, to the extent reasonably possible, any Protected Material, and 

requesting that only the persons permitted access to such Protected Material under this Protective 

Order are the recipients of such information; (c) in the case of a Receiving Party that requests 

inspection of the court file in any Action, ensuring that Receiving Party’s outside counsel and any 

others retained or employed by Receiving Party who may receive access to Protected Material as a 

result of such request have signed the “Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” (Exhibit A); 

and (d) requesting that the German court seal the courtroom from the public, including the Party 

representatives who are not permitted access to Protected Material under this Protective Order, 

during those portions of court hearings when the Protected Material is to be discussed, and to the 

extent reasonably practicable, otherwise referring to citations to the written record for Protected 

Material during court proceedings in lieu of the content of Protected Material where members of the 

public or others are present who are not permitted access to Protected Material. 

6.8 Patent Prosecution Bar. Absent the written consent of the Producing Party, any 

person who reviews “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information 

shall not be involved, directly or indirectly, in any of the following activities for a Party: (i) advising 

on, consulting on, preparing, prosecuting, drafting, editing, and/or amending of patent applications, 

specifications, claims, and/or responses to office actions, or otherwise affecting the scope of claims 

in patents or patent applications relating to Relevant Technology, before any foreign or domestic 

agency, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office; and (ii) the acquisition of patents 

(including patent applications), or the rights to any such patents or patent applications with the right 

to sublicense, relating to Relevant Technology. To avoid any doubt, activities subject to the Patent 

Prosecution Bar as used in this paragraph do not include representing a Party in a post-grant validity 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 15 of 24
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

15 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

proceeding before a domestic or foreign agency (including, but not limited to, a reissue protest, ex 

parte reexamination or inter partes reexamination, or other invalidity-related proceedings in other

jurisdictions, such as “nullity” actions in Germany). This Prosecution Bar shall only apply to

information that is technical in nature, relates to current or anticipated products, and that is 

designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” The Prosecution Bar 

shall not apply to financial or other non-technical information disclosed by a Producing Party and 

designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” or to information that 

is originally created more than ten years prior to the entry of this Protective Order. Any information 

the Producing Party contends should be subject to the Prosecution Bar must be separately labeled 

“SUBJECT TO PROSECUTION BAR.” This Prosecution Bar shall begin when the affected 

individual first reviews “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information 

and shall end two (2) years after final disposition of the Actions. 

6.9 Development Bar. Absent the written consent of the Producing Party, any person 

who receives access to “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” information 

shall not be involved in performing hardware or software development work or product development 

work directly or indirectly intended for commercial purposes relating to Relevant Technology. This 

Development Bar shall only apply to information that is technical in nature, relates to current or 

anticipated products, and that is designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES 

ONLY.” The Development Bar shall not apply to financial or other non-technical information 

disclosed by a Producing Party and designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’

EYES ONLY” or information that is originally created more than ten years prior to the entry of this 

Protective Order. Any information the Producing Party contends should be subject to the 

Development Bar must be separately labeled “SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT BAR.” These 

prohibitions shall begin when the affected individual first reviews “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” materials and until two (2) years after final disposition of the 

Actions. 

7. PROTECTED MATERIAL SUBPOENAED OR ORDERED PRODUCED IN OTHER 

LITIGATION 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 16 of 24
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

16 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

7.1 If a Party is served with a subpoena or a court order issued by any court, arbitral, 

administrative, or legislative body that compels disclosure of any information or items designated 

pursuant to this protective order as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –

ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY,” that Party must: 

promptly notify in writing the Designating Party. Such notification shall 

include a copy of the subpoena or court order; 

promptly notify in writing the party who caused the subpoena or order to issue 

in the other litigation that some or all of the material covered by the subpoena or order is 

subject to this Protective Order. Such notification shall include a copy of this Protective 

Order; and 

cooperate with respect to all reasonable procedures sought to be pursued by 

the Designating Party whose Protected Material may be affected. If the Designating Party 

timely seeks a protective order, the Party served with the subpoena or court order shall not 

produce any information designated pursuant to this protective order as “CONFIDENTIAL,” 

“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” before a determination by the 

court from which the subpoena or order issued, unless the Party has obtained the Designating 

Party’s permission. The Designating Party shall bear the burden and expense of seeking 

protection in that court of its material designated as CONFIDENTIAL,” “HIGHLY 

CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY.” Nothing in this Protective Order should 

be construed as authorizing or encouraging a Receiving Party in the above-captioned case or 

the Actions to disobey a lawful directive from another court or any arbitral, administrative, or 

legislative body. 

8. UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF PROTECTED MATERIAL 

8.1 If a Receiving Party learns that, by inadvertence or otherwise, it has disclosed 

Protected Material to any person or in any circumstance not authorized under this Protective Order, 

the Receiving Party must immediately (a) notify in writing the Designating Party of the unauthorized 

disclosures and provide to such counsel all known relevant information concerning the nature and 

circumstances of the disclosure, (b) use its best efforts to retrieve improperly disclosed Protected 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 17 of 24
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

17 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

Material, (c) inform the person or persons to whom unauthorized disclosures were made of all the 

terms of this Protective Order, and (d) request such person or persons to execute the 

“Acknowledgment and Agreement to Be Bound” that is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 

9. INADVERTENT PRODUCTION OF PRIVILEGED OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED 

MATERIAL 

9.1 When a Producing Party gives notice to Receiving Parties that certain inadvertently 

produced material is subject to a claim of privilege or other protection, the obligations of the 

Receiving Parties are those set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(B). Any 

inadvertent production of privileged or otherwise protected material that satisfies Federal Rule of 

Evidence 502(b) shall not be deemed to have waived the privilege or protection. 

9.2 Nothing herein shall prevent the Receiving Party from preparing a record for its own 

use containing the date, author, addresses, and topic of the inadvertently produced Discovery 

Material and such other information as is reasonably necessary to identify the Discovery Material 

and describe its nature to the Court in any motion to compel production of the Discovery Material. 

10. CHALLENGING CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS 

10.1 Timing of Challenges. Any Party may challenge a designation of confidentiality at 

any time. Unless a prompt challenge to a Designating Party’s confidentiality designation is 

necessary to avoid foreseeable, substantial unfairness, unnecessary economic burdens, or a 

significant disruption or delay of the litigation, a Party does not waive its right to challenge a 

confidentiality designation by electing not to mount a challenge promptly after the original 

designation is disclosed. 

10.2 Meet and Confer. The Challenging Party shall initiate the dispute resolution process 

by providing written notice of each designation it is challenging and describing the basis for each 

challenge. To avoid ambiguity as to whether a challenge has been made, the written notice must 

recite that the challenge to confidentiality is being made in accordance with this specific paragraph 

of the Protective Order. The parties shall attempt to resolve each challenge in good faith and must 

begin the process by conferring directly (in voice to voice dialogue; other forms of communication 

are not sufficient) within 7 days of the date of service of notice. In conferring, the Challenging Party 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 18 of 24
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

18 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

must explain the basis for its belief that the confidentiality designation was not proper and must give 

the Designating Party an opportunity to review the designated material, to reconsider the 

circumstances, and, if no change in designation is offered, to explain the basis for the chosen 

designation. A Challenging Party may proceed to the next stage of the challenge process only if it 

has engaged in this meet and confer process first or establishes that the Designating Party is 

unwilling to participate in the meet and confer process in a timely manner. 

10.3 Judicial Intervention. If the Parties cannot resolve a challenge without court 

intervention, the Designating Party shall file and serve a motion to retain confidentiality under Civil 

Local Rule 7 (or the Court’s procedures for resolving discovery disputes and in compliance with 

Civil Local Rule 79-5, if applicable) within 21 days of the initial notice of challenge or within 14 

days of the parties agreeing that the meet and confer process will not resolve their dispute, 

whichever is earlier. Each such motion must be accompanied by a competent declaration affirming 

that the movant has complied with the meet and confer requirements imposed in the preceding 

paragraph. Failure by the Designating Party to make such a motion including the required 

declaration within 21 days (or 14 days, if applicable) shall automatically waive the confidentiality 

designation for each challenged designation. In addition, the Challenging Party may file a motion 

challenging a confidentiality designation at any time if there is good cause for doing so, including a 

challenge to the designation of a deposition transcript or any portions thereof. Any motion brought 

pursuant to this provision must be accompanied by a competent declaration affirming that the 

movant has complied with the meet and confer requirements imposed by the preceding paragraph. 

The burden of persuasion in any such challenge proceeding shall be on the Designating 

Party. Frivolous challenges and those made for an improper purpose (e.g., to harass or impose 

unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may expose the Challenging Party to sanctions. 

Similarly, frivolous assertions of confidentiality protections and those made for an improper purpose 

(e.g., to harass or impose unnecessary expenses and burdens on other parties) may expose the 

Designating Party to sanctions. Unless the Designating Party has waived the confidentiality 

designation by failing to file a motion to retain confidentiality as described above, all parties shall 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 19 of 24
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

19 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

continue to afford the material in question the level of protection to which it is entitled under the 

Producing Party’s designation until the court rules on the challenge. 

11. MISCELLANEOUS 

11.1 Operability of This Protective Order. This Protective Order supersedes all prior 

orders regarding the disclosure of protected materials. 

11.2 Right to Further Relief. Nothing in this Protective Order abridges the right of any 

person to seek its modification by the Court in the future. By stipulating to this Protective Order, the 

Parties do not waive the right to argue that certain material may require additional or different 

confidentiality protections than those set forth herein. 

11.3 Right to Assert Other Objections. By stipulating to the entry of this Protective Order, 

no Party waives any right it otherwise would have to object to disclosing or producing any 

information or item on any ground not addressed in this Protective Order. Similarly, no Party 

waives any right to object on any ground to use in evidence of any of the material covered by this 

Protective Order. This Protective Order shall not constitute a waiver of the right of any Party to 

claim in the Actions or otherwise that any Discovery Material, or any portion thereof, is privileged 

or otherwise non-discoverable, or is not admissible in evidence in the Actions or any other 

proceeding. 

11.4 Filing Protected Material. A Party that seeks to file under seal any Protected Material 

with the Court must comply with Civil Local Rule 79-5. The standards and procedures outlined in 

Civil Local Rule 79-5 apply in all respects as to filing of materials designated under this Protective 

Order. 

11.5 Burdens of Proof. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary above, nothing in this 

Protective Order shall be construed to change the burdens of proof or legal standards applicable in 

disputes regarding whether particular Discovery Material is confidential, which level of 

confidentiality is appropriate, whether disclosure should be restricted, and if so, what restrictions 

should apply. 

11.6 Discovery Rules Remain Unchanged. Nothing herein shall alter or change in any 

way the discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules for the United 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 20 of 24
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

20 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

States District Court for Northern District of California, or the Court’s own orders. Identification of 

any individual pursuant to this Protective Order does not make that individual available for 

deposition or any other form of discovery outside of the restrictions and procedures of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules for the United States District Court for Northern District 

of California, or the Court’s own orders. 

12. FINAL DISPOSITION 

12.1 Unless otherwise ordered or agreed in writing, within 90 days after the final 

disposition of the Actions, as defined in Section 4.1, the Receiving Party, including Outside Counsel 

for the Receiving Party, shall destroy or return all Protected Material, including Protected Material 

included in work product, pleadings, motion papers, legal memoranda, correspondence, trial 

transcripts and trial exhibits admitted into evidence (“derivations”), with the exception that the 

obligation to destroy all copies of such Discovery Material shall not extend to copies stored in 

disaster recovery backups or other data sources that are not reasonably accessible. As used in this 

subdivision, “all Protected Material” includes all copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries, and 

any other format reproducing or capturing any of the Discovery Material. Whether the Discovery 

Material is returned or destroyed, the Receiving Party must submit a written certification to the 

respective outside counsel of the Producing Party (and, if not the same person or entity, to the 

Designating Party) by the 90 day deadline that (a) identifies (by category, where appropriate) all the 

Protected Material that was returned or destroyed and (b) affirms that the Receiving Party has not 

retained any copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries or any other format reproducing or capturing 

any of the Discovery Material. Notwithstanding this provision, Counsel are entitled to retain an 

archival copy of all pleadings, motion papers, trial, deposition, and hearing transcripts, legal 

memoranda, correspondence, deposition and trial exhibits, expert reports, attorney work product, and 

consultant and expert work product, even if such materials contain Protected Material. Any such 

archival copies that contain or constitute Protected Material stored in disaster recovery backups or 

other sources that are not reasonably accessible remain subject to this Protective Order as set forth in 

Section 4.1. 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 21 of 24
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

21 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

12.2 The Court shall retain jurisdiction after final disposition of the above-captioned case 

to hear and resolve any disputes arising out of this Protective Order. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: January 27, 2020 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

 GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 

By: /s/ Arpita Bhattacharyya 

Arpita Bhattacharyya, Ph.D. 

Attorney for Petitioners 

BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG and 

BMW BANK GMBH 

Dated: January 27, 2020 HOPKINS & CARLEY 

 A Law Corporation 

By: /s/ Peter E. Nissly 

Jason S. Angell 

Peter E. Nissly 

Attorney for 

BROADCOM CORPORATION. BROADCOM, INC. 

AND BROADCOM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

ATTESTATION 

Counsel for Bayerische Motoren Werke AG and BMW Bank GMBH hereby attests by her 

signature below that concurrence in the filing of this document was obtained from counsel for 

Broadcom Corporation. Broadcom, Inc. and Broadcom Technologies, Inc. 

Dated: January 27, 2020 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, 

 GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 

By: /s/ Arpita Bhattacharyya 

Arpita Bhattacharyya, Ph.D. 

Attorney for Petitioners 

BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG and 

BMW BANK GMBH

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 22 of 24
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

1 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 

DATED: _____________________ ________________________________

Honorable Virginia K. DeMarchi 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Northern District of California 

 

^

AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT, February 4, 2020

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 23 of 24
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 [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

CASE NO. 5:19-MC-80272-VKD

EXHIBIT A—ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND 

I, _____________________________ [print or type full name], of _________________ 

[print or type full address], declare under penalty of perjury that I have read in its entirety and 

understand the Protective Order that was issued by the United States District Court for the Northern 

District of California on [date] in the case of In Re Ex Parte Application Of BAYERISCHE 

MOTOREN WERKE AG and BMW BANK GMBH, Case No. ________________. I agree to comply 

with and to be bound by all the terms of this Protective Order and I understand and acknowledge that 

failure to so comply could expose me to sanctions and punishment in the nature of contempt. I 

solemnly promise that I will not disclose in any manner any information or item that is subject to this 

Protective Order to any person or entity except in strict compliance with the provisions of this 

Protective Order. 

I further agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of California for the purpose of enforcing the terms of this Protective Order, even 

if such enforcement proceedings occur after termination of the Actions. 

I hereby appoint __________________________ [print or type full name] of 

_______________________________________ [print or type full address and telephone number] as 

my California agent for service of process in connection with the Actions or any proceedings related 

to enforcement of this Protective Order. 

Date: ______________________________________ 

Location where sworn and signed: _________________________________ 

Printed name: _______________________________ 

Signature: ________________________________ 

Case 5:19-mc-80272-WHO Document 20 Filed 02/04/20 Page 24 of 24