IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD and 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 2:23-CV-00103-JRG-RSP 

DEFENDANTS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION TO REDACT PORTIONS OF THE 

OCTOBER 2, 2024 HEARING TRANSCRIPT 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 12193
1 

Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. 

(“Samsung”) respectfully submit this motion to redact certain limited portions of the October 2, 

2024 hearing transcript on various discovery motions. On October 9, 2024, Samsung notified the 

Court of its intent to request redactions of this transcript. Dkt. 165. 

I. BACKGROUND 

On October 2, 2024, the Court held a hearing on various discovery motions. Dkt. 159. 

During that hearing, the parties and the Court discussed matters designated as “CONFIDENTIAL 

– ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” under the Protective Order (Dkt. 65). For example, the parties 

discussed certain confidential commercial agreements between the Defendants and third-party 

Google, as well as Samsung confidential business information concerning its use of the accused 

technologies. 

II. REQUEST FOR REDACTION 

“The ‘right to inspect and copy judicial records is not absolute.’” See Erfindergemeinschaft 

Uropep GbR v. Eli Lilly & Co., Case No. 2:15-cv-1202-WCB, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14099, at 

*3 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 1, 2017) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978)). 

“The decision whether to allow public access to court records is left to the ‘sound discretion of the 

trial court ... to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.’” 

Id. (quoting Nixon, 435 U.S. at 599). “Where the materials relate to non-dispositive issues, the 

interest in disclosure is less compelling. In particular, the materials filed in connection with 

discovery disputes unrelated to the merits of the case have been identified as the kinds of court 

materials for which there is not a compelling need for public disclosure; the presumption of 

disclosure has therefore been held inapplicable in that setting.” Id. at *5. 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 2 of 10 PageID #: 12194
2 

Here, the narrowly tailored redactions maintain the confidentiality of matters designated as 

confidential under the Protective Order (Dkt. 65). The redacted materials relate to discovery 

issues, not to dispositive issues, thereby rebutting the presumption of disclosure. Samsung thus 

believes it is appropriate to redact such information from the transcript and now moves to 

effectuate the redaction of such information. Samsung requests that the Court order the redaction 

of the material discussed on the following pages of the October 2, 2024 hearing transcript: 

Page Line No(s) Reason 

5 10-15, 22-25 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

6 1-4, 16 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

10 3-6, 12-18 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

11 13-14, 16 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

12 15, 17-25 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

13 1-2, 5, 7-8, 24-25 Reveals details concerning confidential commercial 

agreements with third party Google 

14 1, 2, 5-9, 14-16 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

15 14-15 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

23 8-10, 16-23 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

24 2-4, 6, 9-10, 21-24 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google, and 

negotiations concerning the same 

26 1-3, 6-8, 10, 13-14, 22 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

27 6-7 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google, and 

negotiations concerning the same 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 3 of 10 PageID #: 12195
3 

Page Line No(s) Reason 

29 25 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

30 1, 5 Reveals confidential details concerning confidential 

commercial agreements with third party Google 

49 22 Reveals confidential Samsung business information 

50 4, 20 Reveals confidential Samsung business information 

51 3, 7-8, 10-13, 16-18 Reveals confidential Samsung business information 

52 8-10, 16 Reveals confidential Samsung business information 

Samsung’s requested redactions are highlighted in Exhibit A, attached hereto. Where 

possible, these redactions were targeted so as not to include the entire line. Counsel for Headwater 

Research, LLC represented that they do not oppose the requested relief. 

Samsung considers the details of its commercial agreements with Google and aspects of its 

own business information to be highly sensitive and confidential, as they are not otherwise known 

to the public. Public disclosure of information concerning the commercial agreements between 

Samsung and Google creates a risk of harm to Samsung and third-party Google during future 

negotiations and/or business transactions. This harm outweighs the presumption of public access 

at least because the redactions will not affect the public’s ability to understand the underlying 

issues in the rest of the record, as the confidential specifics that are proposed for redaction are not 

germane to the issues decided at the October 2, 2024 hearing. 

Good cause exists to redact this information from the transcript in light of the potential 

harm to Samsung and third-party Google. This motion is brought shortly after the October 2, 2024 

hearing in which this information was raised on the record. And all individuals present in the 

courtroom during the October 2, 2024 hearing were subject to this case’s Protective Order (Dkt. 

65)—i.e., the attorneys for the parties, the Court, its clerks, and supporting staff members. As 

such, there was no need to seal the courtroom during the discussion of the confidential Samsung 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 4 of 10 PageID #: 12196
4 

business information and the confidential commercial agreements between Samsung and thirdparty Google. As noted above, redacting the requested details does not inhibit the public’s ability 

to understand the dispute, the arguments, or the resolution. Samsung respectfully requests that the 

Court grant its motion for these targeted redactions. 

III. CONCLUSION 

Samsung respectfully requests that the Court grant its unopposed motion to redact the 

October 2, 2024 hearing transcript and enter the redacted transcript containing the proposed 

redactions attached as Exhibit A into the public record. 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 5 of 10 PageID #: 12197
5 

Dated: October 23, 2024 Respectfully submitted, 

By: /s/ Katherine D. Prescott 

 Ruffin B. Cordell 

TX Bar No. 04820550 

Michael J. McKeon 

DC Bar No. 459780 

mckeon@fr.com 

Jared Hartzman (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

DC Bar No. 1034255 

hartzman@fr.com 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

1000 Maine Avenue, SW, Ste 1000 

Washington, D.C. 20024 

Telephone: (202) 783-5070 

Facsimile: (202) 783-2331 

Thad C. Kodish 

GA Bar No. 427603 

tkodish@fr.com 

Benjamin K. Thompson 

GA Bar No. 633211 

bthompson@fr.com 

Jonathan B. Bright 

GA Bar No. 256953 

jbright@fr.com 

Christopher O. Green 

GA Bar No. 037617 

cgreen@fr.com 

Noah C. Graubart 

GA Bar No. 141862 

graubart@fr.com 

Sara C. Fish 

GA Bar No. 873853 

sfish@fr.com 

Nicholas A. Gallo 

GA Bar No. 546590 

gallo@fr.com 

Steffen C. Lake (pro hac vice forthcoming) 

GA Bar No. 512272 

lake@fr.com 

Vivian C. Keller (pro hac vice) 

GA Bar No. 651500 

keller@fr.com 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 6 of 10 PageID #: 12198
6 

1180 Peachtree St. NE, Fl. 21 

Atlanta, GA 30309 

Telephone: (404) 892-5005 

Facsimile: (404) 892-5002 

Leonard E. Davis 

TX Bar No. 05521600 

ldavis@fr.com 

Andria Rae Crisler 

TX Bar No. 24093792 

crisler@fr.com 

Thomas H. Reger II 

Texas Bar No. 24032992 

reger@fr.com 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

1717 Main Street, Suite 5000 

Dallas, TX 75201 

Telephone: (214)747-5070 

Facsimile: (214) 747-2091 

John-Paul R. Fryckman (pro hac vice) 

CA Bar No. 317591 

John W. Thornburgh 

CA Bar No. 154627 

thornburgh@fr.com 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

12860 El Camino Real, Ste. 400 

San Diego, CA 92130 

Telephone: (858) 678-5070 

Facsimile: (858) 678-5099 

Katherine D. Prescott (pro hac vice) 

CA Bar No. 215496 

prescott@fr.com 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

500 Arguello Street 

Suite 400 

Redwood City, CA 94063 

Telephone: (650) 839-5180 

Facsimile: (650) 839-5071 

Kyle J. Fleming (pro hac vice) 

NY Bar No. 5855499 

kfleming@fr.com 

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. 

7 Times Square, 20th Floor, 

New York, NY 10036 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 7 of 10 PageID #: 12199
7 

Telephone: (212) 765-5070 

Facsimile: (212) 258-2291 

Melissa R. Smith 

State Bar No. 24001351 

Melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com 

GILLAM & SMITH, LLP 

303 South Washington Avenue 

Marshall, Texas 75670 

Telephone: (903) 934-8450 

Facsimile: (903) 934-9257 

Andrew Thompson (“Tom”) Gorham 

State Bar No. 24012715 

tom@gillamsmithlaw.com 

GILLAM & SMITH, LLP 

102 N. College, Suite 800 

Tyler, Texas 75702 

Telephone: (903) 934-8450 

Facsimile: (903) 934-9257 

Michael E. Jones 

State Bar No. 10929400 

mikejones@potterminton.com 

Shaun W. Hassett 

State Bar No. 24074372 

shaunhassett@potterminton.com 

POTTER MINTON, P.C. 

102 N. College Ave., Suite 900 

Tyler, Texas 75702 

Telephone: (903) 597-8311 

Facsimile: (903) 593-0846 

Lance Lin Yang 

CA. Bar No. 260705

Lanceyang@quinnemanuel.com 

Kevin (Gyushik) Jang 

CA Bar No. 337747 

kevinjang@quinnemanuel.com 

Sean S. Pak 

CA Bar No. 219032 

seanpak@quinnemanuel.com 

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &

SULLIVAN, LLP

50 California Street, 22nd Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 8 of 10 PageID #: 12200
8 

Telephone: (415) 875-6600 

Brady Huynh (admitted pro hac vice) 

CA Bar No. 339441 

bradyhuynh@quinnemanuel.com 

QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &

SULLIVAN, LLP 

555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor 

Redwood Shores, CA 94065 

Telephone: (650) 801-5000 

Facsimile: (650) 801-5100 

Jon Bentley Hyland 

Texas Bar No. 24046131 

jhyland@hilgersgraben.com 

Grant K. Schmidt 

Texas Bar No. 24084579 

gschmidt@hilgersgraben.com 

HILGERS GRABEN PLLC 

7859 Walnut Hill Lane, Suite 335 

Dallas, Texas 75230 

Telephone: (972) 645-3097 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. AND

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

 

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 9 of 10 PageID #: 12201
9 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE 

Pursuant to Local Rules CV-7(h) and (i), I hereby certify that counsel of record for 

Samsung and Headwater have met and conferred. Headwater does not oppose this motion. 

/s/ Katherine D. Prescott 

Katherine D. Prescott

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL 

 I certify that the following document is authorized to be filed under seal pursuant to the 

Protective Order in this case.

/s/ Katherine D. Prescott 

Katherine D. Prescott 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was filed 

electronically in compliance with Local Rule CV-5 on October 23, 2024. As of this date, all 

counsel of record had consented to electronic service and are being served with a copy of this 

document through the Court’s CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(a)(3)(A). 

/s/ Katherine D. Prescott 

Katherine D. Prescott

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 189 Filed 10/30/24 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:

12202