Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01268/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-01268-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNIRAM TECHNOLOGY, INC.,

Plaintiff(s),

 vs.

MONOLITHIC SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY,

INC, et al.,

Defendant(s). /

No. C 04-1268 VRW (MEJ)

ORDER RE: TAPEOUT FILES

The Court is in receipt of the parties' joint meet and confer letter, filed March 22, 2006,

regarding plaintiff UniRAM Technology, Inc.'s ("UniRAM") request to compel defendant Taiwan

Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd.'s ("TSMC") to produce tapeout files responses to its

discovery requests. UniRAM argues that the files are the key evidence from which it can ascertain

whether TSMC's products infringe its patents and misappropriate its trade secrets. In response,

TSMC seems to agree that the tapeout files are relevant, at least to some extent, but argues that the

files contain proprietary information of its customers; therefore, it cannot disclose them without

permission under the terms of non-disclosure agreements. Because of the number of customers

involved, TSMC seeks permission for the third parties to submit individual oppositions to

UniRAM's request.

Upon review of the parties' letter, the Court finds that the parties can narrow the scope of this

dispute, if not resolve it in its entirety, before presenting it to the Court for resolution. Accordingly,

the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 163 Filed 03/24/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

1) Within 21 days, TSMC shall provide UniRAM with a list and explanation of its customers'

specific objections to producing the tapeout files. TSMC shall also state what additional

protections its customers seek.

2) Within 7 days of receipt of TSMC's customers' objections, UniRAM shall provide TSMC

with a written response to each objection, including which objections should reasonably limit

the scope of production.

3) Upon completion of this briefing, the parties shall meet and confer in person to determine

how the materials can be produced subject to TSMC's customers' reasonable objections. 

During their meet and confer, the parties should be mindful that the tapeout files appear

relevant and should be produced in some form. If necessary, the parties may draft a

stipulated protective order for production of the tapeouts.

If unable to resolve their dispute after the further meet and confer session, the parties shall

then file a joint letter addressing the third parties' objections which are unresolved. Due to the

number of customers involved, the Court shall not consider briefing from third parties; rather, all

objections shall be presented in the form of a joint letter from the named parties. If necessary due to

the sheer volume of unresolved objections, the parties may seek leave to file a joint letter in excess

of five pages.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 23, 2006 

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:04-cv-01268-VRW Document 163 Filed 03/24/06 Page 2 of 2