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

1

The Court did not seal the December 18, 2009 hearing and the parties did not request that the

transcript of that hearing be filed under seal. Therefore, the Court declines to seal the portions of these

transcripts requested by Defendants in Docket No. 684. On the other hand, the Court will consider the

proposed redactions to the hearing transcript for the October 26, 2009 hearing, even though that

transcript was not filed under seal; the October 26, 2009 hearing was a continuation of the September

30, 2009 hearing, which was sealed. It was the Court’s intention that the transcripts of both the

September and October hearings were to be filed under seal. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VOLTERRA SEMICONDUCTOR

CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

 PRIMARION, INC., ET AL.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

Case No. C-08-05129 JCS

ORDER RE PROPOSED REDACTIONS

TO HEARING TRANSCRIPTS OF

SEPTEMBER 30, 2009, OCTOBER 26,

2009, DECEMBER 18, 2009, JANUARY

22, 2010 & JANUARY 27, 2010 AND

COURT’S NOVEMBER 17, 2009 ORDER

[Docket Nos. 683, 684, 693, 703, 739]

At the request of the parties, a number of hearings in this case were sealed. In particular, the

Court sealed the hearings (or portions thereof) that were held on September 30, 2009, October 26,

2009, January 22, 2010 and January 27, 2010.1

 Similarly, the Court filed under seal its November

17, 2009 preliminary injunction order (“the Order”). At the hearings, the Court explained that its

Order and the hearing transcripts would be unsealed, possibly with redactions, after the Court had

considered submissions from the parties identifying the specific portions of the Order and transcripts

that they contended should remain under seal.

The parties have filed proposed redactions, which the Court has reviewed. The Court finds

that all of the proposed redactions to the transcripts of hearings on September 30, 2009, October 26,

2009, January 22, 2010 and January 27, 2010 are narrowly tailored to protect highly confidential

information about the accused products and/or information about the parties’ sales and pricing that

Case 3:08-cv-05129-JCS Document 760 Filed 04/08/10 Page 1 of 3
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

would likely damage the parties’ competitive positions if made public. See Oregonian Pub. Co. v.

U.S. Dist. Court, 920 F.2d 1462, 1465 (9th Cir. 1990) (holding that “presumed right [of access to

court proceedings and documents] can be overcome only by an overriding right or interest ‘based on

findings that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that

interest’”). Therefore, the following shall be under seal:

1. November 17, 2009 Preliminary Injunction Order: The numbers on page 10, lines

6 and 11, as requested by Plaintiff in Docket No. 703, page 1; also, the portions of the

Order listed in Docket No. 739-1, pages 6-7, as requested by Defendants. All of these

redactions are shown in the Declaration of David H. Dolkas in Support of

Defendants’ Administrative Request [Docket No. 739-1], Ex. 3 (Under Seal). 

2. September 30, 2009 Hearing Transcript: The portions of the transcript listed in

Docket No. 739-1, pages 2-4, as requested by Defendants. All of these redactions are

shown in the Declaration of David H. Dolkas in Support of Defendants’

Administrative Request [Docket No. 739-1], Ex. 1 (Under Seal).

3. October 26, 2009 Hearing Transcript: The portions of the transcript listed in

Docket No. 739-1, page 4, as requested by Defendants. All of these redactions are

shown in the Declaration of David H. Dolkas in Support of Defendants’

Administrative Request [Docket No. 739-1], Ex. 2 (Under Seal).

4. January 22, 2010 Hearing Transcript: The portion of the transcript listed in Docket

No. 683, that is, lines 19:2 - 20:14, as requested by Defendants. This redaction is

shown in the Declaration of Daniel R. Foster in Support of Defendants’

Administrative Request to Redact Portions of the Transcript of the Claim

Construction Hearing Held on January 22, 2010 [Docket No. 683-1], Ex. 1 (Under

Seal).

5. January 27, 2010 Hearing Transcript: The portions of the transcript listed in

Docket No. 693, that is, lines 168:17 -169:7 and 169:15 - 170:3, as requested by

Defendants. These redactions are shown in the Declaration of Daniel R. Foster in

Support of Defendants’ Administrative Request to Redact Portions of the Transcript

Case 3:08-cv-05129-JCS Document 760 Filed 04/08/10 Page 2 of 3
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

The Court Reporters who prepared the original transcripts are Katherine A. Powell (September

30, 2009), Katherine Wyatt (October 26, 2009), Sahar McVickers (January 22, 2010) and Lydia Zinn

(January 27, 2010).

3

of the Claim Construction Hearing Held on January 27, 2010 [Docket No. 693-1], Ex.

1 (Under Seal).

The parties are instructed to prepare a redacted version of the Court’s November 17,

2009 Order, consistent with this Order, which will be filed by the Clerk on the public record in

this case. The redacted order should be sent by email to Karen_Hom@cand.uscourts.gov in

pdf format. The Court Reporters who prepared the transcripts of the hearings discussed

above2

 are requested to prepare new transcripts, to be filed on the public record in this case, in

which the sealed portions of the hearings listed above are redacted. In addition, with respect

to the October 26, 2009 hearing transcript, the Court Reporter shall file a complete transcript

of that hearing UNDER SEAL. Finally, the Clerk is instructed to remove from the docket the

transcript of the October 26, 2009 hearing that was filed in this action on November 3, 2009. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 8, 2010

_______________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:08-cv-05129-JCS Document 760 Filed 04/08/10 Page 3 of 3