UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
October 3, 2012
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. ET AL.,
ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF BY STATS CHIPPAC, LTD., STATS CHIPPAC, LTD. DEFENDANTS, COUNTERCLAIMANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Claudia Wilken United States District Court Judge
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR AND STATS CHIPPAC (BVI) LIMITED [PROPOSED] ORDER RE ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL
As set forth in the Motion for Administrative Relief to File Documents Under Seal Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5 (hereafter "the Motion for Administrative Relief") 3 filed by Defendants and Counterclaimants STATS ChipPAC, Inc., STATS ChipPAC, Ltd., and 4 STATS ChipPAC (BVI) Limited (collectively "STATS ChipPAC"), STATS ChipPAC has 5 lodged with the Court a Stipulated Dismissal with Prejudice of the Twelfth Cause of Action 6 "Stipulated Dismissal"). 8 9 by Ocean Tomo ("the Ocean Tomo Report"). The Ocean Tomo Report was commissioned by 10 STATS ChipPAC's counsel to assess the accuracy and completeness of the royalty payments 11 made by STATS ChipPAC pursuant to its TCC License Agreement with Tessera. As shown in 12 the Proposed Redacted Ocean Tomo Report, STATS ChipPAC seeks sealing of only those 13 portions of the Ocean Tomo Report that explicitly reference or detail the amount of royalty 14 payments made by STATS ChipPAC and/or royalty rates allegedly owed by STATS ChipPAC 15 pursuant to its TCC License Agreement with Tessera. 16
17 payments made by STATS ChipPAC. STATS ChipPAC also requests that said royalty payment 18 amount be sealed. 19
Having considered the Motion for Administrative Relief, the Court finds that compelling 20 evidence appears to seal each of the above-described documents as lodged with the Court. With 21 respect to the Ocean Tomo Report, STATS ChipPAC has attested that its competitive standing 22 could be harmed if those documents were publicly disclosed. STATS ChipPAC further attested 23 that it frequently negotiates licensing arrangements of various kinds in which the amount of 24 royalties it will pay to another, or that another company will pay to it, is an important deal term. 25
STATS ChipPAC would be disadvantaged in negotiations for future licensing deals and other 26 business agreements if the amount of royalties it has previously paid to Tessera and/or the 27 royalty rates to which it previously agreed became publicly known. Disclosing this information 28 to the public would create an asymmetry of information for STATS ChipPAC in the negotiation
Against STATS ChipPAC, Ltd., STATS ChipPAC (BVI) Ltd., and STATS ChipPAC, Inc. (the 7 Exhibit 1 to the Stipulated Dismissal (Lodged Under Seal) is a Royalty Review Report
The Stipulated Dismissal also makes a single reference to the amount of royalty of future licensing or other business deals. For these same reasons, it is proper to seal the one 2 statement in the Stipulated Dismissal that references the royalty payments made by STATS 3 ChipPAC. The Court further notes that it has previously sealed similar royalty-related 4 information. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 1061 Order at 4-5. 5 6
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the foregoing documents lodged with the Court shall be filed under seal.
IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated: , 2012
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.