Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Apple Inc., A California Corporation v. Samsung Electronics Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


May 10, 2011

APPLE INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A KOREAN BUSINESS ENTITY;
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION;
SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

On May 5, 2011, Defendants Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively "Samsung") moved to file the following 21 documents under seal: (1) the unredacted version of Samsung's opposition to Plaintiff's motion for 22 expedited discovery; (2) the declaration of Brian Rosenberg in support of Samsung's opposition; 23 and (3) the declaration of Travis Merril in support of Samsung's opposition. Samsung represents 24 that Plaintiff Apple Inc. does not oppose the motion.

Where, as here, a party seeks to seal documents attached to a non-dispositive motion, the Ninth Circuit requires a showing of good cause to justify the sealing of those documents.

Local Rules of this Court require that all requests to file under seal be "narrowly tailored to seek Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2006). In addition, the sealing only of sealable material." Civ. L.R. 79-5(a). Here, Samsung claims that good cause exists 2 to seal the material requested because it contains confidential information relating to unreleased 3 product launch dates, Samsung's total number of employees, and the number of employees 4 involved in the design and marketing of the products at issue. The Court agrees that the 5 declarations Samsung seeks to seal consist almost entirely of such confidential information, and 6 sealing of these documents is therefore appropriate. In addition, Samsung has narrowly tailored the 7 redactions of its opposition brief to seal only material that incorporates the sealable information 8 contained in the declarations. The Court thus finds that good cause exists to seal these documents 9 and GRANTS Samsung's motion to file under seal.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20110510

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.