Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01716/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-01716-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 410
Nature of Suit: Antitrust
Cause of Action: 15:2 Antitrust Litigation

---

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

ASUS COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL, et 

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

INTERDIGITAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01716-BLF 

OMNIBUS ORDER RE: SEALING 

MOTIONS AT ECF 318 AND ECF 319

[Re: ECF 318, 319]

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

opposition brief and exhibits, and reply brief and exhibits, in connection with the parties’ motions 

for summary judgment. ECF 318, 319. For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ motions are 

GRANTED.

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 & Cty. 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)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong 

presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. 

Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to 

motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden 

of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of 

access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 

1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79.

However, “while protecting the public’s interest in access to the courts, we must remain 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 1 of 10
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

mindful of the parties’ right to access those same courts upon terms which will not unduly harm 

their competitive interest.” Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., 727 F.3d 1214, 1228–29 (Fed. 

Cir. 2013). Records attached to motions that are “not related, or only tangentially related, to the 

merits of a case” therefore are not subject to the strong presumption of access. Ctr. for Auto 

Safety, 809 F.3d at 1099; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (“[T]he public has less of a need 

for access to court records attached only to non-dispositive motions because those documents are 

often unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action.”). Parties moving 

to seal the documents attached to such motions must meet the lower “good cause” standard of 

Rule 26(c). Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted). This 

standard requires a “particularized showing,” id., that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the 

information is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 

1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). “Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated by 

specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co., 

966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992). A protective order sealing the documents during discovery 

may reflect the court’s previous determination that good cause exists to keep the documents 

sealed, see Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179–80, but a blanket protective order that allows the parties 

to designate confidential documents does not provide sufficient judicial scrutiny to determine 

whether each particular document should remain sealed. See Civ. L.R. 79-5(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.”).

In addition to making particularized showings of good cause, parties moving to seal 

documents must comply with the procedures established by Civ. L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 

79-5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request that establishes the document is 

“sealable,” or “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under 

the law.” “The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material, and 

must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).” Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). In part, Civ. L.R. 79-5(d) requiresthe 

submitting party to attach a “proposed order that is narrowly tailored to seal only the sealable 

material” which “lists in table format each document or portion thereof that is sought to be 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 2 of 10
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

sealed,” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(b), and an “unredacted version of the document” that indicates “by 

highlighting or other clear method, the portions of the document that have been omitted from the 

redacted version.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d). “Within 4 days of the filing of the Administrative 

Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration as required by subsection 

79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1).

II. DISCUSSION 

The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs’ sealing motions and the declarations of the designating 

parties submitted in support thereof. The Court finds that the parties have articulated compelling 

reasons to seal certain portions of the submitted documents. The proposed redactions are 

generally narrowly tailored. The Court’s rulings on the sealing requests are set forth in the tables 

below.

A. ECF 318 (Plaintiffs’ Motion as to Plaintiffs’ Opposition and Exhibits)

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

318-4 Exhibit A to Sealing 

Declaration

GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 2 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 4, 

ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-5 Exhibit B GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 3 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-6 Exhibit C GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 4 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-7 Exhibit D GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 3 of 10
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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 5 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-9 Exhibit E GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 6 at ECF 

318-1. 

318-10 Exhibit F GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 7 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-11 Exhibit G GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 8 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-12 Exhibit H GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 9 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-13 Exhibit I GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 

10 at ECF 318-1. 

318-14 Exhibit J GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

13, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-16 Exhibit K GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential and highly 

sensitive information relating to

the parties’ licensing negotiation 

communications. Franzinger 

Decl. ¶ 12 at ECF 318-1. 

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

14, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 4 of 10
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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-18 Exhibit L GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

15, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-19 Exhibit M GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

16, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-20 Exhibit N GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

17, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-21 Exhibit O GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ arbitration 

proceedings. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 

16 at ECF 318-1. 

318-22 Exhibit P GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 17 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

318-23 Exhibit Q GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 18 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

318-25 Exhibit R GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 5 of 10
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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 19 at ECF 318-

1. 

318-26 Exhibit S GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 20 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

318-27 Exhibit T GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 21 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

318-28 Exhibit U GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

24, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-29 Exhibit V GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

agreement. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 23 

at ECF 318-1. 

318-31 Exhibit W GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to plaintiffs’ pricing 

strategies and the parties’ 

negotiations. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 

24 at ECF 318-1. Disclosure of 

such information would harm 

Plaintiffs. Id.

318-33 Exhibit X GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 25 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

27, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 6 of 10
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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-34 Exhibit Y GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

28, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-35 Exhibit Z GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

29, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-36 Exhibit AA GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

30, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

318-38 Exhibit BB GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

agreements. Rees Decl. ¶ 31, ECF 

273. Id.

318-40 Exhibit CC GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiations. Rees Decl. ¶ 32, 

ECF 273. Id.

318-42 Exhibit DD GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to parties’ licensing 

agreement. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 31 

at ECF 318-1. Disclosure of such 

information would harm Plaintiffs. 

Id.

318-44 Exhibit EE GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to parties’ licensing 

agreement. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 32 

at ECF 318-1. Disclosure of such 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 7 of 10
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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

information would harm Plaintiffs. 

Id.

318-45 Exhibit FF GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 33 at ECF 318-

1. Disclosure of such information 

would harm Plaintiffs. Id.

318-46 Exhibit GG GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to parties’ licensing 

agreement. Franzinger Decl. ¶ 34 

at ECF 318-1. Disclosure of such 

information would harm Plaintiffs. 

Id.

318-47 Exhibit HH GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

36, ECF 273. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

B. ECF 319 (Plaintiffs’ Motion as to Plaintiffs’ Reply and Exhibits)

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

319-4 Exhibit A GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 2 at ECF 319-

1. 

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 4, 

ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-5 Exhibit B GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 5, 

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 8 of 10
9

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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-6 Exhibit C GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 6, 

ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-8 Exhibit D GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 7, 

ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-10 Exhibit E GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ license 

negotiations with Plaintiffs. Rees

Decl. ¶ 8, ECF 302. Disclosure of 

such information would cause 

harm to Defendants, the 

designating party. Id.

319-11 Exhibit F GRANTED. Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 9, 

ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-13 Exhibit G GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ internal 

patent analyses. Rees Decl. ¶ 10, 

ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-15 Exhibit H GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to the parties’ licensing 

negotiation communications. 

Franzinger Decl. ¶ 9 at ECF 319-

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 9 of 10
10

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

ECF 

No.

Document to be Sealed: Result Reasoning

1. 

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ internal 

licensing practices and negotiation 

strategies. Rees Decl. ¶ 11, ECF 

302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

319-17 Exhibit I GRANTED as to 

highlighted portions by 

the designating parties.

Contains confidential information 

relating to Defendants’ licenses 

with third parties. Rees Decl. ¶ 

12, ECF 302. Disclosure of such 

information would cause harm to 

Defendants, the designating party. 

Id.

III. ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ motions at ECF 318 and ECF 319 are GRANTED. 

The parties need not file lesser redacted versions of the documents, as the respective designating 

parties have already done so. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 1, 2018

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-01716-BLF Document 323 Filed 11/01/18 Page 10 of 10