VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, No. 5:2017cv05671 - Document 637 (N.D. Cal. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER GRANTING 579 , 591 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 9/7/2023. (blflc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/7/2023) (blflc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/7/2023)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 VLSI TECHNOLOGY LLC, Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 17-cv-05671-BLF 10 INTEL CORPORATION, 11 Defendant. ORDER GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO SEAL [Re: ECF Nos. 579, 591] 12 13 Before the Court are 1) Intel Corporation’s (“Intel”) Administrative Motion to File Under 14 Seal Portions of Its Omnibus Motion for Summary Judgment and Exhibits 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15-17, 15 19, 20, 22-24, and 40-45 Thereto, ECF No. 579 (“Motion I”); and 2) Intel’s Administrative 16 Motion to File Under Seal Portions of its Reply in Support of Omnibus Daubert Motion to 17 Exclude and/or Strike, ECF No. 591 (“Motion II”). For the reasons discussed below, Intel’s 18 motions filed at ECF No. 579 and ECF No. 591 are GRANTED. 19 20 I. LEGAL STANDARD “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records 21 and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City & Cty. Of 22 Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 23 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong 24 presumption in favor of access’ is the starting point.” Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. 25 Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to 26 motions that are “more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden 27 of overcoming the presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of 28 access and the public policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d United States District Court Northern District of California 1 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79. 2 Records attached to motions that are “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits 3 of a case,” however, are not subject to the strong presumption of access. Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 4 F.3d at 1099; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (“[T]he public has less of a need for access to 5 court records attached only to non-dispositive motions because those documents are often 6 unrelated, or only tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action.”). Parties moving to seal 7 the documents attached to such motions must meet the lower “good cause” standard of Rule 8 26(c). Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (internal quotations and citations omitted). This standard 9 requires a “particularized showing,” id., that “specific prejudice or harm will result” if the 10 information is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 11 1210–11 (9th Cir. 2002); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c). “Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated 12 by specific examples of articulated reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int'l Ins. 13 Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992). 14 II. DISCUSSION The documents at issue in Intel’s motions to seal are associated with its summary judgment 15 16 and Daubert motions. These opinions concern infringement and invalidity of the patents at issue 17 in the case, available damages for the alleged infringement, and efforts to strike or exclude expert 18 opinions. These issues are “more than tangentially related to the merits of [the] case” and 19 therefore the parties must provide “compelling reasons” for maintaining the documents under seal. 20 See Ctr. for Auto Safety, 809 F.3d at 1101; see also Finjan, Inc. v. Juniper Network, Inc., No. C 21 17-5659 WHA, 2021 WL 1091512, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 10, 2021). 22 23 A. Motion I (ECF No. 579) Intel seeks to seal selected excerpts from its Motion for Summary Judgment and several of 24 the exhibits. Intel argues that compelling reasons exist to seal the material it seeks to seal 25 “because maintaining the confidentiality of the technical information regarding Intel’s product 26 design and operation, including proposed designs, and manufacturing processes is critical to 27 Intel’s business.” ECF No. 579. Intel further explains that “[k]nowledge of this information by 28 third parties would put Intel at a competitive disadvantage in future product development and in its 2 United States District Court Northern District of California 1 business dealings as its competitors could incorporate that information into their own development 2 strategies and products to gain an unfair advantage over Intel in the market.” Id. Intel bolsters 3 these arguments by providing additional details in the declaration of Mark Selwyn. See Selwyn 4 Decl. ¶ 9 (ECF No. 579-1). 5 The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to seal the highlighted portions of the 6 document. See Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., No. 13-CV-05808-HSG, 2016 WL 7911651, at *1 7 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2016) (finding “technical operation of [defendant's] products” sealable under 8 “compelling reasons” standard); Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., No. 17-CV-04810-HSG, 9 2020 WL 2838812, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020) (noting that courts have found “confidential 10 business information” in the form of “business strategies” sealable under the compelling reasons 11 standard.). The Court also finds that the request is narrowly tailored. The Court’s ruling is summarized below: 12 13 ECF No. Document Intel’s Summary Judgment Motion Portion(s) to Seal Green-boxed portions Ex. 1 Excerpt of the Expert Report of Dr. Thomas M. Conte, dated April 20, 2023 Green-boxed portions Ex. 2 Excerpt of the transcript Green-boxed of Dr. Thomas Conte’s portions July 11, 2023 deposition Ex. 8 Excerpt of the transcript of Arthur Leonard Brown III’s February 15, 2023 deposition Green-boxed portions Ex. 9 Excerpt of the transcript of Russell Fenger’s Green-boxed portions 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Ruling Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential February 17, 2023 deposition 1 2 3 Ex. 10 Excerpt of the transcript of Tristan Brown’s March 31, 2023 deposition Ex. 15 Excerpt of the Green-boxed Supplemented Report of portions Dr. William Henry Mangione-Smith, dated May 16, 2023 Ex. 16 Excerpt of William Mangione-Smith’s July 14, 2023 deposition Ex. 17 Excerpt of the Reply Green-boxed Report of Dr. William portions Henry Mangione-Smith, dated June 22, 2023 Ex. 19 Excerpt of the Reply Expert Report of Dr. Thomas M. Conte Regarding Infringement of the ’836 and ’806 Patents, dated June 22, 2023. Excerpt of the Rebuttal Expert Report of Alyssa B. Apsel, Ph.D., Regarding Noninfringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,675,806 and 8,004,922, dated June 1, 2023 Excerpt of the Expert Report of Dean P. Neikirk, dated April 20, 2023 4 5 Green-boxed portions 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Green-boxed portions 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Ex. 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ex. 22 Green-boxed portions technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Green-boxed portions Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Green-boxed portions Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the 4 1 2 Ex. 23 Excerpt of the transcript Green-boxed of Dean P. Neikirk’s portions July 21, 2023 deposition Ex. 24 Confidential Settlement and Patent License Agreement between Finjan Software, Inc. and Finjan, Inc. on their own behalf and on behalf of their respective Affiliates and Intel Corporation, dated November 20, 2012 Excerpt of the transcript of Gerhard Schrom’s February 10, 2023 deposition Green-boxed portions Ex. 41 Excerpt of the transcript of Steve Gunther’s February 2, 2023 deposition Green-boxed portions Ex. 42 Excerpt of the transcript of Wei-Lun Jen’s August 24, 2022 deposition Green-boxed portions Ex. 43 Excerpt of the transcript of Chris Baldwin’s January 27, 2023 deposition Green-boxed portions Ex. 44 Excerpt of the transcript of Doug B. Ingerly’s February 2, 2023 deposition Green-boxed portions 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Ex. 40 13 Green-boxed portions 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential licensing information that the Court has previously sealed. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 14-15; Dkt. 339. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 1 Ex. 45 Excerpt of the transcript of George Shchupak’s March 29, 2023 deposition B. Motion II (ECF No. 591) 2 3 Green-boxed portions 4 5 United States District Court Northern District of California 6 11-12. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding the design and operation of the accused features. Selwyn Decl. ¶¶ 11-12. Intel seeks to seal selected excerpts from its Reply in Support of Omnibus Daubert Motion 7 to Exclude and/or Strike and several of the exhibits. Intel argues that compelling reasons exist to 8 seal the material it seeks to seal “because maintaining the confidentiality of the technical 9 information regarding Intel’s product design and operation, including proposed designs, and 10 manufacturing processes is critical to Intel’s business.” ECF No. 591. Intel further explains that 11 “[k]nowledge of this information by third parties would put Intel at a competitive disadvantage in 12 future product development and in its business dealings as its competitors could incorporate that 13 information into their own development strategies and products to gain an unfair advantage over 14 Intel in the market.” Id. Intel bolsters these arguments by providing additional details in the 15 declaration of Mark Selwyn. See Selwyn Decl. ¶ 11 (ECF No. 591-1). 16 The Court finds that compelling reasons exist to seal the highlighted portions of the 17 document. See Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint, Inc., No. 13-CV-05808-HSG, 2016 WL 7911651, at *1 18 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 6, 2016) (finding “technical operation of [defendant's] products” sealable under 19 “compelling reasons” standard); Exeltis USA Inc. v. First Databank, Inc., No. 17-CV-04810-HSG, 20 2020 WL 2838812, at *1 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020) (noting that courts have found “confidential 21 business information” in the form of “business strategies” sealable under the compelling reasons 22 standard.). The Court also finds that the request is narrowly tailored. The Court’s ruling is summarized below: 23 24 \\ 25 \\ 26 \\ 27 \\ 28 \\ 6 1 ECF No. 2 3 Document Intel’s Reply Brief In Support of Its Omnibus Daubert Motion 4 5 Portion(s) to Seal Green-boxed portions in Section III at 7:17-18, 20, 23-24 and 10:7-8, 9-10, 12 Green-boxed portions in Section IV at 14:1-2, 3, 6, 7, 15-16 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Ex. 1 Excerpt of the Rebuttal Expert Report of Lauren R. Kindler, dated June 1, 2023 Green boxed portions Ex. 3 Excerpt of a presentation entitled Voltage Dependent SRAM Sleep (VDSS) by Guru Shamanna, as produced with Bates numbers 93799DOC0091475 Page 2 of the exhibit 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 III. Ruling Granted, as green-boxed portions in Section III at 7:17-18, 20, 23-24 and 10:7-8, 9-10, 12 contain highly confidential information regarding Intel’s licenses, including payment terms from Intel’s license agreements, the scope of Intel’s license agreements, and other confidential licensing information. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 16. Furthermore, green-boxed portions in Section IV at 14:1-2, 3, 6, 7, 15-16 contain highly confidential technical information regarding design, development, and operation of Intel’s product features, including proposed designs. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 13. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential information regarding Intel’s licenses, including payment terms from Intel’s license agreements, the scope of Intel’s license agreements, and other confidential licensing information. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 16. Granted, as green-boxed portions contain highly confidential technical information regarding design, development and operation of Intel’s product features, including proposed designs. Selwyn Decl. ¶ 13. ORDER For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Intel’s Motions to Seal at ECF No. 579 and ECF No. 591 are GRANTED. 25 26 27 28 Dated: September 7, 2023 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 7
]]>
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.
