1

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART STIPULATIONS TO EXTEND DEADLINE 

PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 79-5; ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO 

SEAL

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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 

DENYING IN PART STIPULATIONS 

TO EXTEND DEADLINE PURSUANT 

TO LOCAL RULE 79-5; ORDER ON 

PROCEDURES FOR 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO 

SEAL 

Re: Dkt. Nos. 801, 802, 803, 804, 805, 806, 

807, 808, 809, 810, 811, 812, 813, 814, 815, 

816, 817, 818

The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the stipulations to extend deadline 

pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5. ECF Nos. 801, 802, 803, 804, 805, 806, 807, 808, 809, 810, 

811, 812, 813, 814, 815, 816, 817, 818. Specifically, the deadline for filing the declaration 

required by Civil Local Rule 79-5 is September 12, 2018. No further extensions will be granted.

Moving forward, to facilitate compliance with the sealing rules and the standards 

established within the Ninth Circuit, the Court hereby establishes the following procedures for 

filing administrative motions to file under seal in this case:

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 821 Filed 09/05/18 Page 1 of 3
2

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART STIPULATIONS TO EXTEND DEADLINE 

PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 79-5; ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO 

SEAL

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

The parties shall file all administrative motions to file under seal as joint motions. Prior to 

filing any such joint motions, lead counsel for both parties must meet and confer to decide what 

information the parties will request to file under seal. The parties must file declarations from lead 

counsel that confirm compliance with this order with each motion to file under seal. The parties 

shall file concurrent with the administrative motion to file under seal all necessary declarations 

establishing that the information sought to be sealed is sealable. For motions that are “more than 

tangentially related to the underlying cause of action,” Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 

809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. FCA U.S. LLC v. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 137 S. 

Ct. 38, 196 L. Ed. 2d 26 (2016), the declarations shall set forth the “compelling reasons supported 

by specific factual findings” that the parties believe “outweigh the general history of access and 

the public policies favoring disclosure,” Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 

1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). For motions that are “not 

related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of a case,” Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1099, 

the declarations shall set forth the “particularized” reasons that the parties believe that “specific 

prejudice or harm will result” if the information is disclosed, Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. 

Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002) (citation omitted). Except for the 

four day deadline for filing declarations, the parties shall also comply with all other requirements 

set forth in Civil Local Rule 79-5(d).

To the extent practicable, the parties shall also follow this procedure with non-parties. 

Where it is impracticable for the parties to follow this procedure with respect to a particular nonparty, the parties’ declarations must provide the reasons why it was not practicable to follow this 

procedure with respect to that non-party. The parties’ declarations must also identify which 

material that particular non-party seeks to seal, and that particular non-party will have seven days, 

rather than the four days prescribed in Civil Local Rule 79-5, to file the requisite declaration

establishing that the information sought to be sealed is sealable.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 821 Filed 09/05/18 Page 2 of 3
3

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART STIPULATIONS TO EXTEND DEADLINE 

PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 79-5; ORDER ON PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO 

SEAL

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

Dated: September 5, 2018

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 821 Filed 09/05/18 Page 3 of 3