Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05235/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05235-87/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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR

INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 09-5235 MMC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL

(DKT. NOS. 580, 586, 600);

DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF

Before the Court are two administrative motions filed May 9, 2014 (Dkt. Nos. 580,

586), and one administrative motion filed July 18, 2014 (Dkt. No. 600), by which motions

plaintiff seeks leave to file under seal the following documents, on the ground defendants

have designated the material as confidential: (1) the entirety of Exhibits A and B to the

Declaration of Michael R. Headley in Support of Power Integrations’ Brief in Support of Its

Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law; (2) portions of Power Integrations’

Opening Brief Requesting a Declaration That This Case is Exceptional and for Award of

Enhanced Damages and Attorneys’ Fees (“Power Integrations’ Brief”); (3) the entirety of

Exhibits J, M-R, LL, and MM to the Declaration of Enrique D. Duarte in Support of [Power

Integrations’ Brief]; and (4) the entirety of Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Michael R. Headley

in Support of Power Integrations’ Opposition to Fairchild’s Renewed Motion for Judgment

Case 3:09-cv-05235-MMC Document 603 Filed 07/28/14 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

2

as a Matter of Law. Having read and considered the three administrative motions, the

Court rules as follows.

Under the Local Rules of this District, where a party seeks to file under seal any

material designated as confidential by another party, the submitting party must file a motion

for a sealing order. See Civil L.R. 79-5(d)-(e). “Within 4 days of the filing of the

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration . . .

establishing that all of the designated information is sealable.” Id. at 79-5(e)(1). “If the

Designating Party does not file a responsive declaration as required by subsection 79-

5(e)(1) and the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal is denied, the Submitting Party

may file the document in the public record no earlier than 4 days, and no later than 10

days, after the motion is denied.” Id. at 79-5(e)(2).

To date, the designating party has not filed a responsive declaration to the abovereferenced motions.

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motions to file under seal are hereby DENIED, and plaintiff is

hereby DIRECTED to file in the public record, no earlier than August 1 and no later than

August 7, 2014, the above-referenced documents.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 28, 2014 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-05235-MMC Document 603 Filed 07/28/14 Page 2 of 2