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

FINJAN, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF (SVK)

ORDER ON MOTIONS TO SEAL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 618, 626, 637, 653

The Administrative Motions to File Documents Under Seal currently before the Court 

include motions filed by Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (Dkt. 618, 626, and 653) and Defendant Cisco 

Systems Inc. (Dkt. 637) (collectively, the “Motions”) seeking to seal certain materials submitted to 

the Court in connection with (1) Finjan’s Motion for Leave to File a Motion for Reconsideration 

of the Court’s Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Report, 

and (2) Finjan’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order on Cisco’s Motion to Strike 

Portions of Finjan’s Amended Expert Reports. 

Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, 

including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 

1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 

(1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of 

access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 

1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to 

court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party 

seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the 

underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For 

Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 661 Filed 06/11/20 Page 1 of 5
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

motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower 

“good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party 

moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local 

Rule 79-5. 

Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information the parties seek to seal 

was submitted to the Court in connection with a discovery-related motion, rather than a motion 

that concerns the merits of the case. Having considered the Motions and supporting declarations, 

as well as the Declarations of Nicole Grigg (Dkt. 631, 632, 637-1, and 655) in support thereof, and 

the pleadings on file, and good cause appearing, the Motions are hereby GRANTED as follows:

Dkt. 618: Finjan’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal

Ex. No. Document Portion(s) to

Seal Reason(s) for Sealing

Finjan Inc.’s Motion for 

Leave to File Motion for 

Reconsideration

GRANTED as to 

Highlighted portions 

at i:15, 18; 2:15, 28; 

3:1, 13-14, 26; 4:18-

22, 26; 5:23; 6:2, 10, 

16, 18; 7:3, 4, 6, 9-

14; 8:3, 6, 8-24, 27; 

9:12-13, 19, 25; 

10:13-16, 23; and 

11:14, 17, 23, 26.

Portions of this document contain 

confidential technical information

and source code related to the 

accused Cisco products. Public 

disclosure of this information 

would cause harm to Cisco. 

Redactions are narrowly tailored. 

See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 631) at ¶ 2.

Exhibit 1 to the 

Declaration of 

Aamir A. Kazi in 

Support of Finjan 

Inc.’s Motion for 

Leave to File 

Motion for 

Reconsideration

Excerpt from the Expert 

Report of Dr. Atul 

Prakash Regarding NonInfringement of U.S. 

Patent No. 7,647,633, 

dated August 14, 2019.

Entirety This document contains

confidential technical information 

and source code related to the 

accused Cisco products. Public 

disclosure of this information 

would cause harm to Cisco. See

Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 631) at ¶ 2.

Dkt. 626: Finjan’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal

Ex. No. Document Portion(s) to

Seal Reason(s) for Sealing

Dkt. 623 Finjan Inc.’s Motion for 

Reconsideration

Highlighted portions 

at i:15, 17-18; 2:18; 

3:4-5, 17-18; 4:4; 

Portions of this document contain 

confidential technical information 

and source code related to the 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 661 Filed 06/11/20 Page 2 of 5
3

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

4:23-27; 5:3, 28; 6:7, 

15, 21, 23; 7:8, 9, 11, 

14-19; 8:8, 11, 13, 

14-28; 9:1, 4, 17, 18, 

24; 10:2, 18-21, 28; 

11:19, 22; and 12:1, 

4.

accused Cisco products. Public 

disclosure of this information 

would cause harm to Cisco. 

Redactions are narrowly tailored. 

See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 632) at ¶ 2.

Exhibit 1 to the 

Declaration of 

Aamir A. Kazi in 

Support of Finjan 

Inc.’s Motion for 

Reconsideration

Excerpt from the Expert 

Report of Dr. Atul 

Prakash Regarding NonInfringement of U.S. 

Patent No. 7,647,633, 

dated August 14, 2019.

Entirety This document contains

confidential technical information 

and source code related to the 

accused Cisco products. Public 

disclosure of this information 

would cause harm to Cisco. See

Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 632) at ¶ 2.

Dkt. 637: Cisco’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal

Ex. No. Document Portion(s) to

Seal Reason(s) for Sealing

Cisco’s Brief in 

Opposition to Finjan 

Inc.’s Motion for 

Reconsideration

Table of Contents, 

lines 10-11; page 2,

lines 13-15, 21;

page 6, line 20;

page 7, lines 3,

10, 12-13, 22;

page 8, lines 12-

13, 24; page 9,

lines 2, 5, 16,

page 10, lines

13, 15, 18-20;

page 11, lines

18, 20-22; page

12, lines 21-22;

page 13, lines 5,

12, 14, 21, 23,

27-18; page 14,

lines 3, 9, 11,

13, 15

Portions of this document contain 

confidential technical information 

and source code related to the 

accused Cisco products. Public 

disclosure of this information 

would cause harm to Cisco. 

Redactions are narrowly tailored. 

See Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 637-1) at ¶ 

2.

Exhibit 1 to the 

Grigg 

Declaration of in 

Support of 

Cisco’s Brief in 

Excerpt from the Expert 

Report of Dr. Atul 

Prakash Regarding NonInfringement of U.S. 

Patent No. 7,647,633,

Entire Document This document contains

confidential technical information 

and source code related to the 

accused Cisco products. Public 

disclosure of this information 

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 661 Filed 06/11/20 Page 3 of 5
4

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

Opposition to 

Finjan Inc.’s 

Motion for 

Reconsideration

dated August 14, 2019. would cause harm to Cisco. See

Grigg Decl. (Dkt. 637-1) at ¶ 2.

Dkt. 653: Finjan’s Administrative Motion to File Under Seal

Ex. No. Document Portion(s) to Seal Reason(s) for Sealing

Finjan Inc.’s Reply In 

Support Of Its Motion 

For Reconsideration of 

the Court’s Order on 

Cisco’s Motion to Strike 

Portions of Finjan’s 

Amended Expert 

Reports (Dkt. No. 582)

Highlighted portions 

at: 3:4,8; 4:3-28; 

5:21-22; 6:7, 10, 14, 

20-21, 24-25; 7:13-

14, 18-21, 25, 28; 8:3, 

6-11, 14-15, 21; 

10:15, 17, 19, 21; 

11:4, 7, 12, 14, 16, 

24; and 12:5-6.

Portions of this document 

contain confidential 

technical information and 

source code related to the 

accused Cisco products. 

Public disclosure of this 

information would cause 

harm to Cisco. 

Redactions are narrowly 

tailored. See Grigg Decl. 

(Dkt. 655) at ¶ 2.

Exhibit 2 to the 

Declaration of 

Aamir A. Kazi 

in Support of 

Finjan Inc.’s 

Reply In 

Support of Its 

Motion for 

Reconsideration 

of the Court’s 

Order on 

Cisco’s Motion 

to Strike 

Portions of 

Finjan’s 

Amended 

Expert Reports 

(Dkt. No. 582)

Excerpt from the August 

27, 2019, Deposition of 

Patrick McDaniel

Entirety This document contains

confidential technical 

information and source 

code related to the 

accused Cisco products. 

Public disclosure of this 

information would cause 

harm to Cisco. See Grigg 

Decl. (Dkt. 655) at ¶ 2.

Exhibit 3 to the 

Declaration of 

Aamir A. Kazi 

in Support of 

Finjan Inc.’s 

Reply In 

Support of Its 

Motion for 

Reconsideration 

of the Court’s 

Order on 

Excerpt from the April 

17, 2019, Deposition of 

Donald Owens

Entirety This document contains

confidential technical 

information and source 

code related to the 

accused Cisco products. 

Public disclosure of this 

information would cause 

harm to Cisco. See Grigg 

Decl. (Dkt. 655) at ¶ 2.

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 661 Filed 06/11/20 Page 4 of 5
5

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

Cisco’s Motion 

to Strike 

Portions of 

Finjan’s 

Amended 

Expert Reports 

(Dkt. No. 582)

SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 11, 2020

SUSAN VAN KEULEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 661 Filed 06/11/20 Page 5 of 5