Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03148-56/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

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

Documents Under Seal,” filed April 9, 2007, by which plaintiff seeks leave to file an

unredacted version of its motion for summary judgment, a declaration offered in support

thereof, and 68 exhibits offered in support thereof.

“A sealing order may issue only upon a request that establishes that the document,

or portions thereof, is privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 638 Filed 04/11/07 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

In the event any or all of the documents that are the subject of the instant motion for

administrative relief have been designated as confidential by defendants, plaintiff need only

state such fact in a supporting declaration, whereafter defendants must, within five days, in

order to avoid the documents being filed in the public record, file a declaration that

establishes why each such document is sealable. See Civil L.R. 79-5(d).

2

protection under the law.” Civil L.R. 79-5(a). “The request must be narrowly tailored to

seek sealing only of sealable material.” Id. “A stipulation . . . will not suffice to allow the

filing of documents under seal.” Id.

In the instant motion for administrative relief, plaintiff states, without elaboration, that

each document it seeks to file under seal “contain[s] information designated confidential.” 

(See Pl’s Mot. at 1:14-15.) Plaintiff has, however, offered no evidence in support of such

assertion, which is, in any event, wholly conclusory in nature. Although plaintiff has offered

the Declaration of Keith P. Gray in support of the instant motion, said declarant states only

that counsel for defendants has advised plaintiff that defendants would not oppose

plaintiff’s administrative motion; as noted, a stipulation is insufficient to allow the filing of

documents under seal.

Accordingly, the Court will DEFER ruling on plaintiff’s administrative motion for

administrative relief to provide plaintiff the opportunity to supplement, no later than April 18,

2007, said motion with a declaration or declarations to “establish” why each document it

seeks to have filed under seal is “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise

entitled to protection under the law.” See Civil L.R. 79-5(a).1 If plaintiff, as of April 18, 

2007, fails to make a sufficient showing as to one or more of the documents in question,

the motion will be denied as to each such document as to which such insufficient showing

has been made, and the Clerk will be directed to follow the procedure set forth in Civil Local

Rule 79-5(e).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 11, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-03148-MMC Document 638 Filed 04/11/07 Page 2 of 2