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

FINJAN, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 

SEAL AT ECF 322

[RE: ECF 322]

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s administrative motion to file under seal portions of the 

briefing and exhibits submitted in connection with Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Strike 

Finjan's Expert Reports on Infringement (ECF 323). ECF 322. For the reasons that follow, the 

motion to seal is GRANTED. 

I. LEGAL STANDARD

“Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 

and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cty. Of 

Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 

U.S. 589, 597 & n. 7 (1978)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong 

presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. 

Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to 

motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden 

of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of 

access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 

1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79. Parties moving to seal documents 

must also comply with the procedures established by Civ. L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 79-
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

5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request 

that establishes the document is “sealable,” or “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or 

otherwise entitled to protection under the law.” “The request must be narrowly tailored to seek 

sealing only of sealable material, and must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).” Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). 

In part, Civ. L.R. 79-5(d) requires the submitting party to attach a “proposed order that is narrowly 

tailored to seal only the sealable material” which “lists in table format each document or portion 

thereof that is sought to be sealed,” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(b), and an “unredacted version of the 

document” that indicates “by highlighting or other clear method, the portions of the document that 

have been omitted from the redacted version.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d). “Within 4 days of the 

filing of the Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a 

declaration as required by subsection 79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material 

is sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(e)(1). 

II. DISCUSSION 

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s sealing motion and the declaration of the designating 

party submitted in support thereof. The Court finds that Plaintiff and the designating party have

articulated compelling reasons to seal certain portions of the requested documents. The proposed 

redactions are narrowly tailored. The Court’s rulings on the sealing requests are set forth in the 

table below.

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

322-48 Plaintiff Finjan, Inc.’s 

Opposition to Defendant 

Cisco Systems, Inc.’s 

Motion to Strike Finjan’s 

Expert Reports on 

Infringement 

GRANTED as 

to the 

highlighted 

portions at 

page 3, lines 

26-27; page 4, 

lines 1-3; page 

5, lines 12-13, 

14-15, 16, 20, 

22, 23; page 6, 

lines 1, 5, 6-7, 

20-22; page 8, 

lines 9-10, 16-

18, 18-19, 21-

23; page 9, 

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶ 2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.
3

123456789

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

lines 4-6, 7-8, 

9-15, 16-17 

322-4

Exh. 1

Chart listing the terms 

identified in Cisco’s 

Motion to Strike Finjan’s 

Expert Reports on 

Infringement in View of 

the Orders dated June 11, 

2019, and July 7, 2019, 

identifying where the 

relevant functionalities 

were disclosed in Finjan’s 

infringement contentions, 

and identifying where and 

how the same functionality 

is disclosed in the 

respective expert reports. 

See Kobialka Decl., ¶ 2, 

ECF 323-2.

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-6

Exh. 2

March 15, 2019 Letter 

from counsel for Finjan, 

James Hannah, to counsel 

for Cisco, Jarrad Gunther

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-8

Exh. 2A

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Matthew 

Watchinski

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-10 Excerpts of Deposition GRANTED as If filed publicly, this
4

123456789

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

Exh. 2B

Transcript of Craig 

Brozefsky

to the entire 

document.

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-12

Exh. 2C

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Alfred Huger

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-14

Exh. 2D

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Jacob 

Valentic

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-16

Exh. 3

March 29, 2019 Letter 

from counsel for Finjan, 

James Hannah, to counsel 

for Cisco, Jarrad Gunther

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 
5

123456789

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-18

Exh. 3A

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Charles Buck

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-20

Exh. 3B

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Surya Allena

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-22

Exh. 3C

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Dean De Beer

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-24 Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Matthew 

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could
6

123456789

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

Exh. 3D Donnan document. be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-26

Exh. 4

April 18, 2019 Letter from 

counsel for Finjan, James 

Hannah, to counsel for 

Cisco, Jarrad Gunther

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-28

Exh. 4A

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Philip Kwok

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-30

Exh. 4B

Excerpts of Deposition 

Transcript of Srinivas 

Kuruganti

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,
7

123456789

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-32

Exh. 4C

Technical document 

marked as Ex. 7 to the 

Deposition Transcript of 

Philip Kwok, bates-labeled 

CISCO-

FINJAN_00000346.0001-

19 

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-34

Exh. 4D

Technical document bates-

labeled CISCO-

FINJAN_00132230.0001-

94

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-36

Exh. 4E

Presentation bates-labeled 

CISCO-

FINJAN_00000080.0001-

48

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-38

Exh. 5

Expert Report of Eric Cole 

Ph.D., Regarding 

Infringement by Cisco 

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s
8

123456789

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

Systems, Inc. of Patent 

Nos. 6,154,844 and 

8,677,494

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-40

Exh. 6

Expert Report of Michael 

Mitzenmacher, Ph.D. 

Regarding Infringement by 

Cisco Systems, Inc. of 

Patent Nos. 6,804,780 and 

8,141,154

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-42

Exh. 7

Expert Report of Nenad 

Medvidovic, Ph.D. 

Regarding Infringement by 

Cisco Systems, Inc. of 

Patent No. 7,647,633

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-44

Exh. 9

Rebuttal Expert Report of 

Dr. Kevin Almeroth on 

Non-Infringement of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 6,154,844 and 

8,141,154

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use
9

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

ECF

No.

Document to be Sealed Result Reasoning

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

322-46

Exh. 10

Rebuttal Expert Report of 

Dr. Patrick McDaniel 

Regarding the NonInfringement of the ‘494 

and ‘780 Patents

GRANTED as 

to the entire 

document.

If filed publicly, this

confidential information could

be used to Cisco’s

disadvantage by competitors,

as it reveals the identification,

organization, and/or operation

of Cisco’s proprietary

products. Bartow Decl. ¶¶ 2-4, 

ECF 344. In particular,

Cisco’s competitors could use

this confidential information to

map proprietary features of

Cisco’s products. Id.

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to seal at 

ECF 322. No further action is necessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 16, 2019

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge