Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148-82/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO.,

LTD.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MEDIATEK, INC., et al.,

Defendants 

MEDIATEK, INC,

Counterclaimant,

 v.

MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO.,

LTD., et al.

Counterclaim Defendants

 /

No. C 05-3148 MMC

ORDER DEFERRING RULING ON

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF TO FILE

DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;

DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF

Before the Court is plaintiff’s “Unopposed Motion for Administrative Relief to File

Documents Under Seal,” filed May 4, 2007, by which plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal

several documents offered in connection with plaintiff’s reply in support in its motion for

summary judgment.

Plaintiff represents that certain of the documents it seeks to file under seal have

been designated as confidential by defendants, or by plaintiff solely because defendants

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 1025 Filed 05/08/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

If plaintiff fails to timely comply with either order, the instant motion will be denied,

as it pertains to documents designated as confidential by third-parties, and the Clerk will

follow the procedure set forth in Civil Local Rule 79-5(e) with respect to such documents.

2

have designated material contained therein as confidential. To the extent the motion

pertains to such documents, the Court DEFERS ruling thereon until May 11, 2007. See

Civil L.R. 79-5(d).

Plaintiff also represents that one document it seeks to file under seal has been

designated as confidential by third-party ASUSTek, and that other documents it seeks to

file under seal contain material designated as confidential by third-parties, which thirdparties plaintiff has failed to identify. Plaintiff is hereby DIRECTED to file, no later than May

11, 2007, proof of service of the instant motion and this order on ASUSTek and on each

third-party who has designated as confidential material contained in any document plaintiff

seeks to file under seal. Further, plaintiff is DIRECTED to file, no later than May 11, 2007,

a supplemental declaration setting forth, as to each document plaintiff seeks leave to file

under seal in light of a designation by a third-party, the identity of the designating third-party

or third-parties.1

 The Court will defer ruling on the motion, to the extent it is based on

designations by third-parties, until a date no earlier than five days after plaintiff has served

the above-referenced documents on the subject third-parties, to afford the third-parties the

opportunity to establish why such documents, either in their entirety or in part, are sealable.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 8, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 1025 Filed 05/08/07 Page 2 of 2