Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-00393/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-00393-1/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

TECHNICAL LED INTELLECTUAL 

PROPERTY, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

BVGA MIPOW (USA) CO., LTD,

Defendant.

Case No. 19-cv-00393-JCS 

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE ADMINISTRATIVE 

MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL

Re: Dkt. No. 29

On January 6, 2020, Plaintiff Technical LED Intellectual Property, LLC (“Technical

LED”) filed an administrative motion to file under seal supplemental evidence in support of its 

motion for default judgment. See Admin. Mot. (dkt. 29). In a federal civil action, documents 

“more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action”—a standard met here for 

documents offered to prove Technical LED’s damages—may be filed under seal only for 

“compelling reasons.” See Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1096–99, 

1101 (9th Cir. 2016). Requests to file under seal “must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only 

of sealable material,” which often requires redactions rather than sealing of documents in their

entirety. See Civ. L.R. 79-5(b).

For most of the documents at issue, the only basis for sealing stated in the accompanying 

declaration of Technical LED’s attorney is that non-parties Amazon and Best Buy designated the 

documents as confidential when they produced them to Technical LED in response to subpoenas. 

See Heidelberger Decl. (dkt. 29-1). Parties’ private agreement to designate material as 

confidential is not alone sufficient to show compelling reasons to depart from the presumption of 

public access to judicial proceedings. Moreover, the Court discerns no threat of harm for 

disclosure of, or other compelling reason to seal, Amazon and Best Buy’s sales contact 

Case 3:19-cv-00393-SI Document 30 Filed 03/17/20 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

information for Defendant BVGA Mipow (USA) Co. Ltd. and sales figures for the particular line 

of allegedly infringing “smartbulb” products at issue in this case, which make up a de minimis

fraction of the business conducted by two of the country’s largest electronics retailers. See Ex. 

1-M (dkt. 29-6) (summary chart indicating total sales of less than $500,000 for each retailer across 

several years and products at issue). The administrative motion to seal those documents is 

DENIED, without prejudice to Amazon and Best Buy filing their own motions to seal. 

Technical LED is ORDERED to serve a copy of this order on Amazon and Best Buy by 

any means reasonably calculated to provide actual notice, and to file proof of such service in the 

record of this action no later than March 24, 2020. If Amazon or Best Buy believes that 

compelling reasons warrant sealing of the documents at issue, they may file their own motions no 

later than March 31, 2020. If no such motions are filed by that deadline, Technical LED shall file 

the documents in the public record no later than April 7, 2020.

The Court also notes that Technical LED failed to file copies of certain Excel spreadsheets 

at issue in the record of this action. Docket entries 29-2 through 29-5, for Exhibits 1-C, 1-D, 1-E, 

and 1-H, indicate that the files at issue were delivered to chambers on a thumb drive. Documents 

that cannot be filed electronically via ECF must be manually filed with the Clerk’s office pursuant 

to Civil Local Rule 5-1(f). When Technical LED files these documents in the public record—or if 

the Court grants leave to file them under seal on a motion by Best Buy or Amazon—Technical 

LED must comply with that local rule.

The only document at issue that does not pertain to Amazon or Best Buy sales information

is Exhibit 1-O, which includes Technical LED’s confidential settlement agreements with other 

alleged infringers. The PDF version of that document filed in the ECF record at docket entry 29-7 

cannot be opened. Because that document has not yet been effectively filed, the motion to file 

under seal is DENIED, without prejudice to Technical LED filing a renewed motion with an 

accessible copy of the document attached no later than March 31, 2020.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 17, 2020 ______________________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

Chief Magistrate Judge

Case 3:19-cv-00393-SI Document 30 Filed 03/17/20 Page 2 of 2