CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY v. MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LTD. et al, No. 2:2009cv00290 - Document 838 (W.D. Pa. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that, for reasons more fully stated within, Defendants' "Motion for Leave to File Certain Slides and Photographs Used by the Parties During Trial Under Seal" 772 and "Motion to File Under Seal the A ffidavit of Sehat Sutardja in Support of Marvells Motion for Judgment on Laches" 797 are denied. In so holding, the Court also denies Marvell's requests as expressed within Marvell's briefing (Docket No. 772 , 818 ) for leave to seal slides at Docket No. 708 and to redact portions of the transcripts. An appropriate Order follows. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 3/29/13. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix A) (jg)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
09-290 CMU v. Marvell Appendix A DDemo No. Title D-Demo 1 Marvell Opening Slides Total Chip Sales by Customer Slide 80 Information Contained Marvell Argument as to Potential Harm Court s Ruling Lists total unit chips sales between March 6, 2003 to July 28, 2012 in total and by customer (Fujitsu, Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, Toshiba, Western Digital, Other Customers ). ï · ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · Disclosure of these sales figures would cause Marvell competitive harm by allowing competitors to use the per-customer production data, revenue data, sales numbers and production numbers to calibrate their pricing and distribution methods so as to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace to these individual customers. Disclosure would harm Marvell s largest customers in that their competitors could compare publicly provided revenue 1 information with the number of units shown in this chart. D-Demo 7 Slide DDX7-7 Marvell Damages Expert Hoffman Slides End Customer Lists total MNP/NLD and Units unit sales in total and by customer (Fujitsu, Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, Toshiba, Western Digital, Other Customers ). Same information as DDemo 1 Slide 80. Slides used in Cross Examination of Lawton Slide CL- End Customer Lists total MNP/NLD 11 and Units unit sales in total and (Slide CL-11) by customer (Fujitsu, Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, Toshiba, Western Digital, Other Customers ). Same graphic as D-Demo 7 Slide 7. Same See D-Demo 1, ¶ 1 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. See D-Demo 1, ¶ 1 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs D-Demo 11 2 Slide CL- Samples Sold 14 to Toshiba Had $0.06 Operating Profit Differential (Slide CL-14) information D-Demo 1 Slide 80 Marvell per unit ï · premiums of C7500 v. C7500M, and C5575 and C5575M. (Non Accused and Accused Models). List of Infringing Chips that Ms. Lawton looked at ï · to determine a difference in estimated operating profit delta between models with and without the MNP. Lawton Table 13. ï · D-Demo 15 Hoffman ReDirect Gross Margin Lawton Schedule 38 the public's interest in accessing them. Disclosure of this data will permit customers and suppliers to gain unfair leverage against Marvell in pricing and supply agreement negotiations. Publication will disclose to Marvell s customers the difference in price per chip Marvell charges its customers and would jeopardize Marvell s positions and relationships with these customers. Disclosure will cause Marvell competitive harm by allowing competitors to use the per-customer pricing data to calibrate their own pricing so as to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace to these individual customers. See D-Demo 11 (Slide CL3 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. Data blurred in background. Slides give Total Gross Margin on ALL SOCs vs Accused Infringing SOCs, and All Read Channels vs Accused Infringing Read Channels. 14), ¶¶ 1,3 ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. End Customer, Units and Royalty Lists total unit sales and royalty (based on $0.50) in total and by customer (Fujitsu, Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, Toshiba, Western Digital, Other Customers ). Same information generally as D-Demo 1 Slide 80. See D-Demo 1, ¶¶ 1,2 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. See D-Demo 1,¶ 1 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this D-Demo 16 D-Demo 17 Slide 115 Marvell Closing Slides End Customer Lists total MNP/NLD and Units unit sales in total and by customer (Fujitsu, Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, 4 Slide 120 Total Chip Sales by Customer DX-1608 Admitted Trial Exhibit Price Comparison of Marvell s Production Volume and NonProduction Volume Chips Toshiba, Western Digital, Other Customers ). Same graphic as D-Demo 7 Slide 7. Same information D-Demo 1 Slide 80 Lists total unit chips See D-Demo 1, ¶ 1, 2 sales between March 6, 2003 to July 28, 2012 in total and by customer (Fujitsu, Hitachi, Maxtor, Samsung, Seagate, Toshiba, Western Digital, Other Customers ). Same graphic as D-Demo 1 Slide 80 Lists sales of 88C7500M to Maxtor in 2005 and Seagate from 2005 to 2008, by revenue, unit and average selling price (ASP), divided into sales to Asia and Sales to North America. See D-Demo 1, ¶ 1 5 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As an exhibit offered by the Defendants during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DX-1609 P-Demo 9 Slide 4 Slide 5 Admitted Trial Exhibit Price Comparison of Accused & Non-Accused Products Sales to Western Digital Proposed Slides for Ms. Lawton Marvell Storage Revenue and Operating Profit FY2000-2013 Marvell Lists sales of Accused SOC 88i6540 and non-accused SOC 88i5540 for Q4 2004 to Q4 2005 by Revenue, Unit, Gross Margin, ASP and GM per unit. See D-Demo 1, ¶ 1 ï · DENIED. ï · As an exhibit offered by the Defendants during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Graph of Marvell Storage Revenue and Operating Profit by Year from 2000-2013. ï · ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Graph of Marvell Disclosure would cause Marvell competitive harm by permitting customers and suppliers to gain unfair leverage against Marvell in pricing and supply agreement negotiations. ï · Disclosure would allow competitors to undercut Marvell s prices and would disadvantage Marvell s competitive position. See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 6 ï · DENIED. MNP/NLD Revenue and Operating Profit: 3/6/20037/28/2012 MNP/NLD Revenue and Operating Profit by year from 20042013. 1, 2 Slide 6 Marvell Shipments of MNP/NLD Chips Graph of Marvell Shipments of MNP/NLD Chips by year from 2003-2012. Disclosure would allow competitors insight into Marvell s production and shipping schedules, thus allowing them to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace. Slide 7 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sales Price and Operating Profit Showing revenue per chip calculation and operating profit per chip calculation. See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 1, 2 7 ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Slide 8 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sales Price and Operating Profit Same as Slide 7 except See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ numbers are shortened 1, 2 (i.e. 10,346,408,755 to 10.35 Billion) Slide 10 Marvell s Operating Profit Per Chip and Sales Price Per Chip Chart of Marvell s Operating Profit per chip to Marvell s Sales Price per chip Slide 11 Marvell s Operating Profit Per Chip and Sales Price Per Chip with Reasonable Royalty to CMU Same graph of Slide See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 10 with addition of bar 1, 2 for reasonable royalty amount. See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 1, 2 8 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs Slides 58, Marvell 101, 113 Monthly Read Channel and SOC Shipments by TechnologyUnits Monthly Shipments of See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) chips from 2000 to May 2012 by Non infringing, MNP, EMNP, and NLV type. Lawton Chart 5. (P-Demo 13 (Slide 1)). ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Slide 133 Read Channel Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD Slide 134 SOC Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD read channel chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 22. (P-Demo 13 (Slide 2)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD SOC chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 23. (P-Demo 13 (Slide 3)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · 9 the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes Slide 152 Marvell 3/2003 HDD Forecast v. Actual Trendfocus Data Slide 156 Marvell RC & SOC Gross Margins, Operating Profits & Excess Profits Line chart comparing Marvell Consumer Market Forecast and HDD Market Forecast to Trendfocus Actual Data. Lawton Chart 21. (P-Demo 16 (Slide 1)). ï · ï · Bar Chart comparing ï · Total Gross Margin, Gross Margin in excess of targets, Total RC-SOC Operating profits, and Total GM in MNP/NLD in excess of targets by ï · year from 2000-2013. Lawton Chart 27. (PDemo 16 (Slide 2)). Would allow competitors insight into Marvell s positions and analysis regarding the future of the read channel and hard drive markets. Disclosure of actual sales figures for certain years would allow competitors to alter their sales, pricing and production strategies based upon Marvell s past manufacturing data. Would permit customers and suppliers to gain unfair leverage against Marvell in pricing and supply agreement negotiations. Would allow competitors to use Marvell s profit margins to calibrate their own pricing and undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace. 10 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Slide 157 Marvell s Excess Profits Calculation of Excess Profits, Profit per Unit, and Total Excess Profits. The same as Slide 10 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Slide 158 Total Reported Sales FY2003-2010 & FY20032004 Sales by Unit, Revenue, Cost, and Gross Margin of C7500, C7500M, C5575, C5575M from 2003-2010. Lawton Table 12. (P-Demo 16 (Slide 4)). Slide 162 Sales price, sales price delta, gross margin delta, estimated operating profit delta for Marvell per unit premiums of C7500 v. C7500M, and C5575 and C5575M. (Non Accused and Accused Models). List of Infringing Chips that ï · Would permit customers and suppliers to gain unfair leverage against Marvell in pricing and supply agreement negotiations ï · Would allow competitors to use Marvell s profit margins to calibrate their own pricing so as to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) ¶¶ 1, 2 See D-Demo 11 (Slide CL14) ¶¶ 1-3 11 ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm one of Marvell s chip lines differentiated by endcustomer Slide 164 E-mail Re: Budgetary Channel Pricing from Marvell Ms. Lawton looked at to determine a difference in estimated operating profit delta between models with and without the MNP. Lawton Table 13. Same as D Demo 11 Slide 14. Internal Marvell ï · emails regarding 7500M pricing. (PDemo 9 (Slide 164)). ï · The same as Slide 17 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Would disclose to Marvell s customers the difference in price per chip See D-Demo (Slide CL-14) ¶¶ 2,3 Slide 168 Accused Infringing Chip / Sales Price Delta 7500M chips with actual sales and ASP. Lawton Schedule 47. (P-Demo 16, Slide 3). See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 1, 2 Slide 169 Top 44 MNP/NLD Line Graph of Top 44 MNP/NLD Chips See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 1, 2 12 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. Chips Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Slide 170 All Marvell Sales - Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Fiscal Quarter DirectMargin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. Lawton Chart 28. (P-Demo 16, Slide 6). Line Graph of all Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter Direct Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 1, 2 The same as Slide 23 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Slide 171 RC & SOC Direct Margin per Unit (FY1999 Q4 FY2013 Q2) Line graph of RC & See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ SOC direct Margin per 1, 2 Unit (FY1999 Q4 FY2013 Q2). The same as Slide 24 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. 13 ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs Slide 187 First Design Win Date and Units Sold by Chip (44 MNP/NLD Infringing Chips) Marvell s excess profit See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ and operating profit 1, 2 per chip amounts conclusions. ï · ï · The same as Slide 25 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Slide 172 Marvell s excess profit and operating profit ï · ï · Bar Chart of First ï · Design Win Date and Units Sold by Chip (44 MNP/NLD Infringing Chips) from 2003 to 2011. Would allow competitors to unfairly emulate Marvell s design timelines and predict future Marvell design timelines based on internal performance figures See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) ¶ 2 ï · ï · See P-Demo 9 (Slide 187) ¶¶ 1,2 ï · ï · ï · Slide 188 First Design Win Date and Units Sold by Chip (44 MNP/NLD Infringing Chips) Same as Slide 187 between 2003-2009. ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · 14 the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. P-Demo 11 P-Demo 13 Slide 1 Slide 2 Lawton Flip Chart Total MNP& NLD Chips (operating profit and revenue calculations) Charts used During Lawton Testimony Marvell monthly Read Channel and SOC Shipments by TechnologyUnits Read Channel Chip Families with and Catherine Lawton hand drawn Flip Chart showing operating profit calculation See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) ¶¶ 1, 2 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Monthly Shipments of chips from 2000 to May 2012 by Non infringing, MNP, EMNP, and NLV type. Lawton Chart 5 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD read See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the 15 without MNP/NLD channel chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 22 ï · ï · ï · Slide 3 SOC Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD SOC chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 23 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Slide 9 P-Demo Marvell Monthly Shipments of 88C7500 and 88C7500M (June 02December 04) Bar Chart of Monthly See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Shipments of 88C7500 and 88C7500M (June 02-December 04). Lawton Chart 25 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Lawton Flip 16 objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. 14 P-Demo 16 Slide 1 Slide 2 Chart Excess Profits & Operating Profit Premium Charts used During Lawton Testimony Marvell 3/2003 HDD Forecast v. Actual Trendfocus Data Marvell RC & SOC Gross Margins, Operating Profit & Excess Profits Lawton hand drawn See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) flip chart listing ¶¶ 1, 2 excess profit and operating profit premium per unit and the number of chips by patent ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Line chart comparing Marvell Consumer Market Forecast and HDD Market Forecast to Trendfocus Actual Data. Lawton Chart 21. Same as P-Demo 9 (Slide 152). ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information See P-Demo 9 (Slide 152) ¶¶ 1, 2 Bar Chart comparing See P-Demo 9 (Slide 156) Total Gross Margin, ¶¶ 1, 2 Gross Margin in excess of targets, Total RC-SOC Operating profits, and Total GM 17 Slide 3 Accused Infringing Chip Sales price Delta Slide 4 Total Reported Sales FY2003FY2010 in MNP/NLD in excess of targets by year from 2000-2013. Lawton Chart 27. Same as P-Demo 9 (Slide 156). 7500M chips with actual sales and ASP. Lawton Schedule 47. See P-Demo 9 (Slide 168). Sales by Unit, Revenue, Cost, and Gross Margin of C7500, C7500M, C5575, C5575M from 2003-2010. Lawton Table 12. Same as PDemo 9 (Slide 158). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) ¶¶ 1, 2 ï · ï · Would allow Marvell s business partners an unfair advantage during future negotiations and sales or supply agreements. Would allow Marvell s competitors to use the per-chip production data, revenue data and sales and production numbers to calibrate their own pricing and undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace. 18 ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Slide 5 Sales price, sales price delta, gross margin delta, estimated operating profit delta for one of Marvell s chip lines differentiated by endcustomer Slide 6 Top 44 MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC P-Demo 20 Lawton Rebuttal Testimony Accused Infringing Chips Marvell per unit See D-Demo 11 (Slide CLpremiums of C7500 v. 14) ¶¶ 1 -3 C7500M, and C5575 and C5575M. (Non Accused and Accused Models). List of Infringing Chips that Ms. Lawton looked at to determine a difference in estimated operating profit delta between models with and without the MNP. Lawton Table 13. Same as D Demo 11 Slide 14. Line Graph of Top 44 See D-Demo 9 ¶¶ 1, 2 MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter DirectMargin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. Lawton Chart 28. Same as PDemo 9 at 169 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Chart of Device, Customer, Sample Date, first Operating ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Disclosure would allow competitors to determine Marvell s and its 19 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Summary of Sample (ES) Date; First MAPL Order Date, 1 Million Units Date P-Demo 21 P-Demo 22 Slide 1 Unit Order, Date of customers sales dates and Million Units. Lawton shipping information Schedule 24 allowing those competitors to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace. ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Lawton Rebuttal Testimony Marvell SOC Unit Shipments to Hitachi, Fujitsu, Samsung, Toshiba and Western Digital 2000 2002 Bar Chart of Marvell SOC Unit Shipments to Hitachi, Fujitsu, Samsung, Toshiba and Western Digital 2000 2002. Lawton Chart 8/ Schedule 19 Disclosure would allow competitors insight into Marvell s production and shipping schedules and each individual customer s specific needs allowing them to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD read channel chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 22. P-Demo 9 Slide 133, P-Demo 13 Slide 2. Disclosure would allow competitors insight into Marvell s production and shipping schedules, allowing them to undercut Marvell s position in the marketplace ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling Closing Statement Read Channel Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD 20 Slide 2 Slide 3 SOC Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD Reasonably Royalty Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD SOC chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 23. Same as P-Demo 9 Slide 134, P-Demo 13 Slide 3. See P-Demo 22 (Slide 1) Lawton Hand Written Flip Chart showing Calculation of royalty base* rate =total royalty. See D-Demo 1 ¶ 1 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Slide 4 Marvell Monthly Read Channel and SOC Shipments by TechnologyUnits Monthly Shipments of chips from 2000 to May 2012 by Non infringing, MNP, EMNP, and NLV type. Lawton Chart 5. Same as P-Demo 9 Slide 58, P-Demo 13 See P-Demo 22 (Slide 1) ï · ï · ï · ï · 21 reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Slide 1. Slide 5 Top 44 MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Slide 6 Paul Yasuda e-mail correspondenc e (April 2002) & Read Channel Block Diagram Sutardja trial testimony Slide 7 Slide 8 Wooldridge trial testimony Slide 9 Kryder trial testimony Slide 10 Lawton trial Line Graph of Top 44 MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter DirectMargin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. Lawton Chart 28. Same as PDemo 9 at 169, PDemo 16 Slide 6. See D-Demo 11(Slide CL14) ¶ 1 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶ 2 Marvell no longer asks the Court to file this slide under seal Marvell no longer asks the Court to file this slide under seal Marvell no longer asks the Court to file this slide under seal Marvell no longer asks the Court to file this slide under seal Marvell no longer asks the 22 ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Moot Moot Moot Moot Moot testimony Court to file this slide under seal DKT. #708.1 & DKT. #708.2 Marvell Storage Revenue and Operating Profit FY2000-2013 Graph of Marvell Storage Revenue and Operating Profit by Year from 2000-2013 (P-Demo 9 (Slide 4)) See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 Page 7 Marvell Accused Revenue and Operating Profit: 3/6/2003 7/28/2012 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sale s price and operating profit See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 Page 8 Marvell shipments of Accused chips containing Graph of Marvell Shipments of MNP/NLD Chips by year from 2003-2012 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Page 6 23 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived MNP or NLD (P-Demo 9 (Slide 6)). Page 9 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sales Price and Operating Profit Showing revenue per chip calculation and operating profit per chip calculation. (PDemo 9 (Slide7)). Page 10 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sales Price and Operating Profit Same as Slide 7 except See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ numbers are shortened 1,2 (ie 10,346,408,755 to 10.35 Billion) (PDemo 9 (Slide 8)). Page 12 Marvell s Chart of Marvell s See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 24 ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. Operating Profit Per Chip and Sales Price Per Chip Operating Profit per 1,2 chip to Marvell s Sales Price per chip. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 10)). Page 13 Marvell s Operating Profit Per Chip and Sales Price Per Chip with Reasonable Royalty to CMU Same graph of Slide See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 10 with addition of bar 1,2 for reasonable royalty amount. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 11)). Page 60, 103, 115 Marvell Monthly Read Channel and SOC Shipments by TechnologyUnits (Docket No. 708.1 & 708.2 p. 60, 102, 115) Monthly Shipments of See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) chips from 2000 to May 2012 by Non infringing, MNP, EMNP, and NLV type. Lawton Chart 5. Same as (P-Demo 9 (Slides 58, 101, 113)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 1)). 25 ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Page 135 Non-Accused Read Channel Chip Families and Total Accused Read Channels Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD read channel chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 22. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 133)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 2)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Page 136 Non-Accused SOC Chip Families and Total Accused SOCs Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD SOC chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 23. Same as P-Demo 9 Slide 134, P-Demo 13 Slide 3. See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Page 154 Marvell 3/2003 HDD Forecast v. Actual Trendfocus Data Line chart comparing Marvell Consumer Market Forecast and HDD Market Forecast to Trendfocus Actual Data. Lawton Chart 21. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 152)), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 1)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 152) ¶¶ 1,2 26 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs Page 158 Page 159 Marvell RC & SOC Gross Margins, Operating Profits & Excess Profits Marvell s Excess Profits Bar Chart comparing See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) Total Gross Margin, ¶¶ 1,2 Gross Margin in excess of targets, Total RC-SOC Operating profits, and Total GM in MNP/NLD in excess of targets by year from 2000-2013. Lawton Chart 27. (PDemo 9 (Slide 156)), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 2)). ï · ï · Calculation of Excess Profits, Profit per Unit, and Total Excess Profits (P-Demo 9 (Slide 157)). ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) ¶¶ 1,2 The same as Slide 10 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 160 Total Reported Sales FY2003-2010 & FY20032004 the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Sales by Unit, Revenue, Cost, and Gross Margin of C7500, C7500M, C5575, C5575M from 2003-2010. Lawton Table 12. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 158)). See P-Demo 16 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 27 ï · ï · ï · The same as Slide 11 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 164 Contains sales Marvell per unit * Missing price, sales premiums of C7500 v. from price delta, C7500M, and C5575 hand gross margin and C5575M. (Non delivery delta and Accused and Accused to the estimated Models). List of Court for operating Infringing Chips that review. profit delta for Ms. Lawton looked at Purported one of to determine a ly the Marvell s difference in estimated same as chip lines operating profit delta P-Demo differentiated between models with 9 Slide by customer and without the MNP. 162 Lawton Table 13. Same as D Demo 11 Slide 14 Page 166 E-mail Re: Internal Marvell Budgetary emails regarding Channel 7500M pricing. (PPricing from Demo 9 (Slide 164)). Marvell The same as Slide 17 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 170 Accused 7500M chips with reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. See D-Demo 11(Slide CL14) ¶¶ 1-3 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. See D-Demo 11(Slide CL14) ¶¶ 2,3 ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 28 Infringing Chip Sales Price Delta Page 171 Page 172 actual sales and ASP. Lawton Schedule 47. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 168)), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 3)). 1,2 Top 44 Accused Chips Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Line Graph of Top 44 MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter DirectMargin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. Lawton Chart 28. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 169)) P-Demo 16 Slide 6. See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 All Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter margin percentage and ASP by RC & SOC The same as Slide 22 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Line Graph of all Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter Direct Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. (PDemo 9 (Slide 170)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 29 ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Page 173 The same as Slide 23 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. RC & SoC Line graph of RC & Direct Margin SoC direct Margin per per Unit Unit (FY1999 Q4 (FY1999 Q4 FY2013 Q2). (PFY2013 Q2) Demo 9 (Slide 171)). ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 The same as Slide 24 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 174 Marvell s excess profit and operating profit Marvell s excess profit See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ and operating profit 1,2 per chip amounts conclusions. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 172)). The same as Slide 25 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. DKT. #708.3 Page 3 First Design Win Date and Units Sold by Bar Chart of First Design Win Date and Units Sold by Chip See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 30 ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, Chip (44 Accused Infringing Chips) DKT. #708.8 Page 7 Page 8 (44 MNP/NLD Infringing Chips) from 2003 to 2011 (P-Demo 9 (Slide 187)). the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Marvell Storage Revenue and Operating Profit FY2000-2013 Graph of Marvell Storage Revenue and Operating Profit by Year from 2000-2013 (P-Demo 9 (Slide 4)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 Marvell MNP/NLD Revenue and Operating Profit: 3/6/20037/28/2012 Graph of Marvell MNP/NLD Revenue and Operating Profit by year from 20042013. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 5)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 31 ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs Page 9 Marvell Shipments of MNP/NLD Chips Graph of Marvell Shipments of MNP/NLD Chips by year from 2003-2012 (P-Demo 9 (Slide 6)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Page 10 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sales Price and Operating Profit Showing revenue per chip calculation and operating profit per chip calculation. (PDemo 9 (Slide7)). . See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Page 11 Calculation of Marvell s Average Sales Price and Operating Profit Same as Slide 7 except See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ numbers are shortened 1,2 (i.e. 10,346,408,755 to 10.35 Billion) (PDemo 9 (Slide 8)). ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · 32 the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes Page 13 Marvell s Operating Profit Per Chip and Sales Price Per Chip Chart of Marvell s See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ Operating Profit per 1,2 chip to Marvell s Sales Price per chip. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 10)). . ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Page 14 Marvell s Operating Profit Per Chip and Sales Price Per Chip with Reasonable Royalty to CMU Pages 61, Marvell 104, 116 Monthly Read Channel and SOC Shipments by TechnologyUnits (Docket No. 708.8 p. 61, Same graph of Slide See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 10 with addition of bar 1,2 for reasonable royalty amount. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 11)). ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · Monthly Shipments of chips from 2000 to May 2012 by Non infringing, MNP, EMNP, and NLV type. Lawton Chart 5. (P-Demo 9 (Slides 58, 101, 113)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 1)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · 33 the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown in an open public proceeding, the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling 104,116) Page 136 Page 137 Page 155 Read Channel Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD SOC Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD Marvell 3/2003 HDD Forecast v. Actual Trendfocus Data Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD read channel chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 22. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 133)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 2)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD SOC chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 23. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 134)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 3)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Line chart comparing Marvell Consumer Market Forecast and HDD Market Forecast to Trendfocus Actual Data. Lawton Chart 21 (P-Demo 9 (Slide 152)), (P-Demo 16 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 152) ¶¶ 1,2 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · 34 reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm (Slide 1)). Page 159 Marvell RC & SOC Gross Margins, Operating Profits & Excess Profits Bar Chart comparing See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) Total Gross Margin, ¶¶ 1,2 Gross Margin in excess of targets, Total RC-SOC Operating profits, and Total GM in MNP/NLD in excess of targets by year from 2000-2013. Lawton Chart 27. (PDemo 9 (Slide 156), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 2)). Page 160 Marvell s Excess Profits Calculation of Excess Profits, Profit per Unit, and Total Excess Profits (P-Demo 9 (Slide 157.) See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 The same as Slide 10 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 161 Total Reported Sales FY2003-2010 & FY20032004 Sales by Unit, Revenue, Cost, and Gross Margin of C7500, C7500M, C5575, C5575M from 2003-2010. Lawton See P-Demo 16 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 35 ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. Table 12. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 158.), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 4)). Page 167 E-mail Re: Budgetary Channel Pricing from Marvell The same as Slide 11 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Internal Marvell emails regarding 7500M pricing. (PDemo 9 (Slide 164)). See D-Demo 11 (Slide CL14) ¶¶ 1-3 The same as Slide 17 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 171 Accused Infringing Chip / Sales Price Delta 7500M chips with actual sales and ASP. Lawton Schedule 47. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 168.), (P-Demo 16, Slide 3). See P-Demo 9(Slide 4) ¶¶ 1, 2 Page 172 Top 44 Accused Line Graph of Top 44 MNP/NLD Chips See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 36 ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. Chips Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Page 173 Page 174 Fiscal Quarter DirectMargin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. Lawton Chart 28. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 169.), (P-Demo 16, Slide 6). All Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter margin percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Line Graph of all Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter Direct Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. (PDemo 9 (Slide 170.) See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 The same as Slide 23 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. RC & SOC Line graph of RC & See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ Direct Margin SOC direct Margin per 1,2 per Unit Unit (FY1999 Q4 (FY1999 Q4 FY2013 Q2). (PFY2013 Q2) Demo 9 (Slide 171.), The same as Slide 24 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or 37 ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs Page 175 Marvell s excess profit and operating profit requested to be sealed. Marvell s excess profit See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ and operating profit 1,2 per chip amounts conclusions. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 172.) Page 89 Read Channel Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD ï · ï · The same as Slide 25 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. DKT. #708.9 Pages 38, Marvell 58, 69 Monthly Read Channel and SOC Shipments by TechnologyUnits (Docket No. 708.9 p.38, 58, 69). ï · ï · ï · Monthly Shipments of chips from 2000 to May 2012 by Non infringing, MNP, EMNP, and NLV type. Lawton Chart 5. (P-Demo 9 (Slides 58, 101, 113)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 1)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD read channel chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 22. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 133)), (P-Demo 13 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) 38 the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm (Slide 2)). Page 90 SOC Chip Families with and without MNP/NLD Total Monthly shipments of MNP/NLD SOC chips by month from 1/99 to 7/12. Lawton Chart 23. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 134)), (P-Demo 13 (Slide 3)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 6) Page 108 Marvell 3/2003 HDD Forecast v. Actual Trendfocus Data Line chart comparing Marvell Consumer Market Forecast and HDD Market Forecast to Trendfocus Actual Data. Lawton Chart 21 (P-Demo 9 (Slide 152)), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 1)). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 152) ¶¶ 1,2 Page 112 Marvell RC & SOC Gross Margins, Operating Profits & Excess Profits Bar Chart comparing See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) Total Gross Margin, ¶¶ 1,2 Gross Margin in excess of targets, Total RC-SOC Operating profits, and Total GM in MNP/NLD in 39 ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would Page 113 Marvell s Excess Profits excess of targets by year from 2000-2013. Lawton Chart 27. (PDemo 9 (Slide 156), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 2)). Calculation of Excess See P-Demo 9 (Slide 157) Profits, Profit per ¶¶ 1,2 Unit, and Total Excess Profits (P-Demo 9 (Slide 157.) Page 118 Total Reported Sales FY2003FY2010 & FY2003FY2004 Sales price, sales price delta, gross margin delta, estimated operating ï · ï · ï · ï · The same as Slide 10 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 114 ï · ï · Sales by Unit, Revenue, Cost, and Gross Margin of C7500, C7500M, C5575, C5575M from 2003-2010. Lawton Table 12. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 158.), (P-Demo 16 (Slide 4)). See D-Demo 11(Slide CL14) ¶¶ 1, 3 Marvell per unit premiums of C7500 v. C7500M, and C5575 and C5575M. (Non Accused and Accused Models). List of See D-Demo 11(Slide CL14) ¶¶ 1-3 ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · ï · 40 cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. DENIED. As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information profit delta for one of Marvell s chip lines differentiated by endcustomer Page 120 E-mail Re: Budgetary Channel Pricing from Marvell Infringing Chips that Ms. Lawton looked at to determine a difference in estimated operating profit delta between models with and without the MNP. Lawton Table 13. Same as D Demo 11 Slide 14. Internal Marvell See D-Demo 11(Slide CLemails regarding 14) ¶¶ 2,3 7500M pricing. (PDemo 9 (Slide 164)), (P-Demo 16, Slide 5). The same as Slide 17 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. Page 124 Accused Infringing Chip Sales Price Delta 7500M chips with actual sales and ASP. Lawton Schedule 47. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 168)); (PDemo 16, Slide 3). See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 Page 125 Top 44 Line Graph of Top 44 See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 41 ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Page 126 Page 127 MNP/NLD Chips Fiscal Quarter DirectMargin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. Lawton Chart 28. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 169)), (P-Demo 16, Slide 6). 1,2 All Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter margin percentage and ASP by RC & SOC Line Graph of all Marvell Sales Fiscal Quarter Direct Margin Percentage and ASP by RC & SOC from 2003 to 2013. (PDemo 9 (Slide 170)), See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 The same as Slide 23 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. RC & SoC Line graph of RC & Direct Margin SoC direct Margin per per Unit Unit (FY1999 Q4 (FY1999 Q4 FY2013 Q2). (PFY2013 Q2) Demo 9 (Slide 171)); See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ 1,2 The same as Slide 24 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or 42 ï · As a judicial record shown during a public jury trial, the objection to future sealing is waived ï · Substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them. ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs requested to be sealed. Page 128 Marvell s excess profit and operating profit the public's interest in accessing them. Marvell s excess profit See P-Demo 9 (Slide 4) ¶¶ and operating profit 1,2 per chip amounts conclusions. (P-Demo 9 (Slide 172)), The same as Slide 25 at Ex. 41 at Docket No. 771 which is not under seal or requested to be sealed. 43 ï · DENIED. ï · As a currently available public record the objection to future sealing is waived ï · There is substantial public interest in the dissemination of this information ï · Insufficient evidence to show disclosure of this slide would cause current competitive harm ï · Court finds that Marvell has not proven a compelling reason that its interest in sealing these slides overcomes the presumption of access to judicial records and outweighs the public's interest in accessing them.
]]>
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.
