UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
March 18, 2013
APPLE, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION,
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., A KOREAN CORPORATION; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION; AND SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL
Before the Court are Apple and Samsung's Renewed Administrative Motions to File Under Seal Documents Relating to Apple's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, ECF Nos. 241 and 242, 21 submitted pursuant to the Court's July 18, 2012 Order, ECF No. 238. 22
Since filing these motions, a trial occurred in the related case involving the same parties, Apple v. Samsung, Case No. 11-CV-01846-LHK ("the 1846 case"), and the Court has issued eight 24 Orders on the parties' post-trial motions. Apple has already appealed one of these Orders. The 25 parties have acknowledged that much of the evidence in the 1846 case and this action is 26 overlapping. See ECF No. 80 at 2-3 (Stipulation and Proposed Order re Discovery). Through the 27 trial and post-trial proceedings, some of the information that the parties seek to seal in these 28 renewed motions has become publicly available. Consequently, some of the information that the parties seek to seal in these renewed motions is no longer entitled to protection from public view 2 under either the "good cause" or "compelling reasons" standard. In addition, through the appeal 3 and subsequent litigation of this Court's ruling on Apple's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in 4 the instant case, further information subject to these renewed motions may have become publicly 5 available. 6 Moreover, on August 9, 2012, this Court issued an Order in the related 1846 case granting 7 in part and denying in part numerous administrative motions to seal documents. See Case No. 11-8 CV-01846-LHK, ECF No. 1649. The Court's August 9, 2012 Order addressed many of the same 9 types of documents that the parties seek seal in these renewed sealing motions: third-party 10 research data; the parties' financial information; licensing information; and business, market, and competitive strategy information. The parties have appealed this Court's August 9, 2012 Order and other sealing Orders from this Court to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. 13
In light of the documents that are no longer entitled to protection from public view and the Court's further clarification of its sealing standards, the Court DENIES without prejudice Apple 15 and Samsung's Renewed Administrative Motions to File Under Seal Documents Relating to 16 Apple's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. 17
The parties may file renewed motions to seal within twenty-one days of the date of this Order. The parties shall not seek to seal any information that has already become part of the public 19 record. In their renewed motions to seal, the parties shall identify what information is sealable 20 pursuant to the Court's August 9, 2012 Order and what information is not sealable pursuant to that 21
Order. For the information that is not sealable pursuant to the Court's August 9, 2012 Order, the 22 parties shall request a stay of a sealing denial pending the Federal Circuit's ruling on the appeal of 23 this Court's August 9, 2012 Order. 24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.