Oracle USA, Inc. et al v. Rimini Street, Inc. et al, No. 2:2010cv00106 - Document 89 (D. Nev. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER granting 87 Motion to Seal. The unredacted 84 Declaration and 80 MOTION for Preservation Order are filed under SEAL. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/30/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Oracle USA, Inc. et al v. Rimini Street, Inc. et al 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Doc. 89 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP RICHARD J. POCKER (NV Bar No. 3568) 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 800 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Telephone: (702) 382-7300 Facsimile: (702) 382-2755 rpocker@bsfllp.com BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (pro hac vice) FRED NORTON (pro hac vice) KIERAN P. RINGGENBERG (pro hac vice) 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874-1000 Facsimile: (510) 874-1460 sholtzman@bsfllp.com fnorton@bsfllp.com kringgenberg@bsfllp.com 11 12 13 14 BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (pro hac vice) THOMAS S. HIXSON (pro hac vice) KRISTEN A. PALUMBO (pro hac vice) Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Telephone: 415.393.2000 Facsimile: 415.393.2286 geoff.howard@bingham.com thomas.hixson@bingham.com kristen.palumbo@bingham.com DORIAN DALEY (pro hac vice application to be submitted) DEBORAH K. MILLER (pro hac vice) JAMES C. MAROULIS (pro hac vice) ORACLE CORPORATION 500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7 Redwood City, CA 94070 Telephone: 650.506.4846 Facsimile: 650.506.7114 dorian.daley@oracle.com deborah.miller@oracle.com jim.maroulis@oracle.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle International Corp. 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 18 19 ORACLE USA, INC., a Colorado corporation; ORACLE AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation; and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, 20 21 22 23 24 Plaintiffs, v. RIMINI STREET, INC., a Nevada corporation; SETH RAVIN, an individual, Defendants. Case No 2:10-cv-0106-LRH-PAL PLAINTIFFS ORACLE USA, INC., ORACLE AMERICA, INC., AND ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION’S MOTION TO SEAL MOTION FOR PRESERVATION ORDER AND DECLARATION OF KIERAN RINGGENBERG IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRESERVATION ORDER 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:10-cv-00106-LRH-PAL Document 87 Filed 08/24/10 Page 2 of 4 1 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL 2 Pursuant to the Stipulated Protective Order governing confidentiality of documents 3 entered by the Court on May 21, 2010 [Docket No. 55] (“Protective Order”) and Rules 5.2 and 4 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc. 5 and Oracle International Corporation (together “Oracle” or “Plaintiffs”) respectfully request that 6 the Court order the Clerk of the Court to file under seal the Motion for Preservation Order 7 (“Motion”), the Declaration of Kieran P. Ringgenberg (“Declaration”), and Exhibits B, G, T, U, 8 and V-DD (“Exhibits”) thereto. Unredacted versions of Motion, Declaration and Exhibits were 9 lodged under seal with the Court on August 24, 2010 [Docket #80, 84]. Redacted versions of the 10 Motion, Declaration and Exhibits were also publicly filed on the Court’s ECF website on August 11 24, 2010 [Docket #82, 83.] 12 For sealing requests relating to non-dispositive motions, such as Plaintiffs’ Motion for a 13 Preservation Order sanctions, the presumption of public access to court filings may be overcome 14 by a showing of good cause under Rule 26(c). See Pintos v. Pacific Creditors Ass'n, 605 F.3d 15 665, 678 (9th Cir. 2010); Kamakana v. Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006). The 16 Court has “broad latitude” under Rule 26(c) “to prevent disclosure of materials for many types of 17 information, including, but not limited to, trade secrets or other confidential research, 18 development, or commercial information.” Phillips v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 19 1211 (9th Cir. 2002) (citations omitted). 20 Specifically, Oracle requests that the following documents and references be sealed: 21 (1) Transcript of the Deposition of Joseph Dones taken on August 12, 2010 regarding 22 Rimini’s information technology infrastructure and designated as Highly Confidential under the 23 Protective Order (Exhibit B); 24 (2) Documents produced by Rimini regarding its technology infrastructure and 25 policies and designated Confidential and Highly Confidential [RSI00050053-7 (Exhibit G) and 26 RSIH0020000118 (Exhibit T)]; 27 28 (3) Attachment D to Rimini’s Responses to First Set of Interrogatories identifying Rimini employees formerly employed by TomorrowNow, and designated as Confidential under 2 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL Case 2:10-cv-00106-LRH-PAL Document 87 1 2 3 4 5 6 Filed 08/24/10 Page 3 of 4 the Protective Order (Exhibit U); (4) Instant messages produced by SAP AG, SAP America, Inc. and TomorrowNow, Inc. and designated as Confidential under the Protective Order (Exhibits V-DD); (5) The unredacted version of the Motion lodged with the Court that contains quotations from items (1) through (4) above. Sealing the Motion, Declaration and Exhibits is requested because the documents 7 contains information designated by Defendants Rimini Street, Inc. (“Rimini”) and Seth Ravin 8 (“Ravin”) and third parties, SAP AG, SAP America, Inc. and TomorrowNow, Inc. as 9 “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential — Attorneys Eyes’ Only” under the terms of the 10 Protective Order. The requested relief is necessary and narrowly tailored to protect the 11 confidentiality of the commercially sensitive business information identified by the designating 12 parties. The Protective Order provides that: “Counsel for any Designating Party may designate 13 any Discovery Material as ‘Confidential Information’ or ‘Highly Confidential Information - 14 Attorneys’ Eyes Only’ under the terms of this Protective Order only if such counsel in good 15 faith believes that such Discovery Material contains such information and is subject to 16 protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The designation by any Designating 17 Party of any Discovery Material as ‘Confidential Information’ or ‘Highly Confidential 18 Information – Attorneys’ Eyes Only’ shall constitute a representation that an attorney for the 19 Designating Party reasonably believes there is a valid basis for such designation.” Protective 20 Order ¶ 2 (emphasis added). 21 Thus, in identifying the Exhibits as “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys 22 Eyes Only,” the designating parties have represented that good cause exists for sealing the 23 Exhibits, and Motion and Declaration referencing the Exhibits. This is a sufficient showing of 24 good cause to permit a sealing order on a non-dispositive motion. See, e.g., Pacific Gas and 25 Elec. Co. v. Lynch, 216 F. Supp. 2d 1016, 1027 (N.D. Cal. 2002). 26 Oracle has prepared redacted versions of these filings for the Court’s public files, which 27 would allow public access to the filings except for those portions containing information 28 designated as Confidential or “Highly Confidential – Attorneys Eyes Only” by other parties 3 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL Case 2:10-cv-00106-LRH-PAL Document 87 1 2 3 Filed 08/24/10 Page 4 of 4 under the Protective Order. Accordingly, the request to seal is narrowly tailored. For the foregoing reasons, Oracle respectfully requests that the Court find that good cause exists to file under seal, the Motion, Declaration and Exhibits. 4 5 DATED: August 24, 2010 BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 6 7 8 9 10 By: /s/ Kieran P. Ringgenberg Kieran P. Ringgenberg Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc., and Oracle International Corp. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL Case 2:10-cv-00106-LRH-PAL Document 87-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP RICHARD J. POCKER (NV Bar No. 3568) 300 South Fourth Street, Suite 800 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Telephone: (702) 382-7300 Facsimile: (702) 382-2755 rpocker@bsfllp.com BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP STEVEN C. HOLTZMAN (pro hac vice) FRED NORTON (pro hac vice) KIERAN P. RINGGENBERG (pro hac vice) 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874-1000 Facsimile: (510) 874-1460 sholtzman@bsfllp.com fnorton@bsfllp.com kringgenberg@bsfllp.com 11 12 13 14 Filed 08/24/10 Page 1 of 2 BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP GEOFFREY M. HOWARD (pro hac vice) THOMAS S. HIXSON (pro hac vice) KRISTEN A. PALUMBO (pro hac vice) Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111-4067 Telephone: 415.393.2000 Facsimile: 415.393.2286 geoff.howard@bingham.com thomas.hixson@bingham.com kristen.palumbo@bingham.com DORIAN DALEY (pro hac vice application to be submitted) DEBORAH K. MILLER (pro hac vice) JAMES C. MAROULIS (pro hac vice) ORACLE CORPORATION 500 Oracle Parkway, M/S 5op7 Redwood City, CA 94070 Telephone: 650.506.4846 Facsimile: 650.506.7114 dorian.daley@oracle.com deborah.miller@oracle.com jim.maroulis@oracle.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle International Corp. 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 18 19 ORACLE USA, INC., a Colorado corporation; ORACLE AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation; and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, 20 21 22 23 24 Plaintiffs, v. RIMINI STREET, INC., a Nevada corporation; SETH RAVIN, an individual, Defendants. Case No 2:10-cv-0106-LRH-PAL ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS ORACLE USA, INC., ORACLE AMERICA, INC., AND ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION’S MOTION TO SEAL MOTION FOR PRESERVATION ORDER AND DECLARATION OF KIERAN RINGGENBERG IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRESERVATION ORDER 25 26 27 28 [PROP] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL 1 2 [PROPOSED] ORDER Pending before this Court is Plaintiffs Oracle USA, Inc., Oracle America, Inc. and Oracle 3 International Corporation (together “Oracle” or “Plaintiffs”) Motion to Seal Administrative 4 Motion to Permit Plaintiffs to File the Motion for Preservation Order [Docket -#80] (“Motion”), 5 the Declaration of Kieran P. Ringgenberg (“Declaration”), and Exhibits B, G, T, U, and V-DD 6 (“Exhibits”) thereto [Docket # 84]. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) provides broad 7 discretion for a trial court to permit sealing of court documents for, inter alia, the protection of “a 8 trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information.” Fed. R. 9 Civ. P. 26(c). Having considered Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal, compelling reasons having been 10 shown and good cause existing: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal is GRANTED. 11 12 The Clerk of the Court shall file under seal the unredacted versions of the Motion and 13 Declarations and Exhibits. IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 DATED: August 30, 2010 16 17 By: Hon. Peggy A. Leen United States Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 [PROP] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO SEAL
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
