Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02123/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02123-38/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THERASENSE, INC.,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

 BECTON, DICKINSON AND COMPANY,

Defendant. /

No. C04-02123 MJJ

No. C04-03327 MJJ

No. C04-03732 MJJ

No. C05-03117 MJJ

ORDER RE: PARTIES’ REQUESTS TO

FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

Before the Court are the Defendants’ various administrative motions to file documents under seal

in connection with their summary judgment motions. (Case No. 04-2123, Docket Nos. 374 & 379; Case

No. 04-3732, Docket Nos. 239 & 249; Case No. 05-3117, Docket Nos. 538, 548 and 554.)

To the extent these administrative motions seek to seal information in which the Defendants

themselves assert a confidentiality interest, the Court finds that Defendants have not made a detailed or

particularized showing as to which documents, or portions of documents, meet the “compelling reasons”

standard set forth in Kamakana v. City of Honolulu, 447 F.2d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006). 

To the extent these administrative motions seek to seal information in which Plaintiffs assert a

confidentiality interest, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to comply with Local Rule 79-5(d) by

either withdrawing the designation of confidentiality or filing a declaration establishing that documents,

or portions of documents, meet the “compelling reasons” set forth in Kamakana.

Moreover, it appears from an initial review that many, if not all, of the sealing requests are

overbroad, as in some instances they broadly seek to place entire documents under seal, portions of

Case 3:04-cv-02123-WHA Document 391 Filed 11/05/07 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

which the Court can perceive no legitimate confidentiality interest by any party.

Accordingly, the Court orders the parties, after meeting-and-conferring regarding the pending

administrative motions, to file supplemental papers no later than Friday, November 9, 2007 that either

(1) withdraw confidentiality designations and the associated sealing requests, or (2) adequately establish,

by sworn declaration, the particularized and specific grounds on which this Court should seal

documents, or portions of documents, under the standards set forth in Kamakana. The Court will enter

a final ruling on any outstanding requests for protective seals in connection with the summary judgment

motions after receiving the parties’ supplemental submissions.

For all future requests for protective seals, the Court refers the parties to, and ORDERS the

parties to comply with, this Court’s September 2007 Standing Order For Cases Involving Sealed Or

Confidential Documents.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 5, 2007 

MARTIN J. JENKINS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:04-cv-02123-WHA Document 391 Filed 11/05/07 Page 2 of 2