Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03002/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-03002-7/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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

DOMINION ASSETS LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

MASIMO CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-03002-BLF 

ORDER RE SEALING MOTION

[Re: ECF 78]

This order specifically addresses Defendants’ renewed administrative motion to file under 

seal portions of an exhibit in relation to their motion for summary judgment. For the reasons 

stated below, the motion is 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 & Cnty. 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)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are 

“more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of 

“compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 

1101-02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed 

upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097. In addition, sealing motions filed in this 

district must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). 

A party moving to seal a document in whole or in part must file a declaration establishing that the 

identified material is “sealable.” 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 

Case 5:14-cv-03002-BLF Document 81 Filed 11/09/16 Page 1 of 2
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

to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are sealable.” Id.

II. DISCUSSION

Defendants move to seal portions of pages 11-12, 19-22, 24-26, 28-32, 35-42, 44-45, 47, 

49-65 and 69-71 of their Exhibit H to the Declaration of Brian C. Claassen in Support of 

Defendants Masimo Corporation and Cercacor Laboratories Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment 

of Noninfringement and Invalidity. ECF 78 at 3. This information has been designated 

confidential by Defendants. Id. As the designating party, Defendants filed a declaration 

indicating that this material contains trade secret technical information regarding the operation of 

the accused products. Claassen Decl. ¶¶ 4-6, ECF 78-1. Defendants’ declaration also indicates 

that this material includes quotations from U.S. Patent Application No. 11/367,017, which is a 

patent application filed with a non-publication request pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 122(b)(2)(B)(i). 

Claassen Decl. ¶ 7, ECF 78-1. The Court finds the sealing request to be narrowly tailored.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to seal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 9, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:14-cv-03002-BLF Document 81 Filed 11/09/16 Page 2 of 2