throbber
Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 628 Filed 10/20/20 Page 1 of 3
`Case: 19-1837 Document: 40 Page: 1 Filed: 10/20/2020
`
`NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
`
`United States Court of Appeals
`for the Federal Circuit
`______________________
`
`FINJAN, INC.,
`Plaintiff-Appellant
`
`v.
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
`Defendant-Appellee
`______________________
`
`2019-1837
`______________________
`
`Appeal from the United States District Court for the
`Northern District of California in No. 3:17-cv-05659-WHA,
`Judge William H. Alsup.
`______________________
`
`Decided: October 20, 2020
`______________________
`
`JUANITA ROSE BROOKS, Fish & Richardson, San Diego,
`CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by
`FRANCIS J. ALBERT, OLIVER RICHARDS; ROBERT COURTNEY,
`Minneapolis, MN; LISA KOBIALKA, HANNAH YUNKYUNG
`LEE, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Menlo Park,
`CA.
`
` JONATHAN STUART KAGAN, Irell & Manella LLP, Los
`Angeles, CA, for defendant-appellee.
`
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 628 Filed 10/20/20 Page 2 of 3
`Case: 19-1837 Document: 40 Page: 2 Filed: 10/20/2020
`
`2
`
`FINJAN, INC. v. JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.
`
` ______________________
`
`
`
`Before PROST, Chief Judge, WALLACH and STOLL, Circuit
`Judges.
`
`PROST, Chief Judge.
`Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) appeals from an order issued by
`the United States District Court for the Northern District
`of California (“Unsealing Order”) amid patent-infringe-
`ment litigation between Finjan and Juniper Networks, Inc.
`(“Juniper”). That order provides for unsealing a Daubert-
`related order (“Daubert Order”) and states in full:
`The order on the Daubert motions, filed under seal
`today, shall remain under seal for two weeks, dur-
`ing which one or more parties may seek appellate
`review of this order to obtain redactions. Thereaf-
`ter, absent order from the United States Court of
`Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the order on the
`Daubert motions will be filed on the public docket
`by December 17 at noon.
`J.A. 1 (emphasis omitted). The district court stayed un-
`sealing of the Daubert Order pending this appeal. J.A. 14.
`Finjan asks us to reverse the Unsealing Order and is-
`sue an order of our own “granting limited redactions of
`eight lines” of the Daubert Order that Finjan asserts dis-
`close confidential licensing terms discussed between Fin-
`jan and third-party licensees. Appellant’s Br. 4. Juniper
`does not oppose. We have jurisdiction under the collateral
`order doctrine. See Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Apple, Inc., 964
`F.3d 1351, 1357–58 (Fed. Cir. 2020); Apple Inc. v. Samsung
`Elecs. Co., 727 F.3d 1214, 1220 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
`DISCUSSION
`“Where, as here, an appeal does not involve substan-
`tive issues of patent law, we apply the law of the regional
`circuit in which the district court sits.” Apple, 727 F.3d
`
`

`

`Case 3:17-cv-05659-WHA Document 628 Filed 10/20/20 Page 3 of 3
`Case: 19-1837 Document: 40 Page: 3 Filed: 10/20/2020
`
`FINJAN, INC. v. JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.
`
`3
`
`at 1220. Courts in the Ninth Circuit “must conscientiously
`balance the competing interests of the public and the party
`who seeks to keep certain judicial records secret.” Id. at
`1221 (citing Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d
`1172, 1179 (9th Cir. 2006)). In Uniloc, for example, we va-
`cated and remanded a portion of an order that “failed to
`make findings sufficient to allow us to adequately assess
`whether [the district court] properly balanced the public’s
`right of access against the interests of the third parties in
`shielding their financial and licensing information from
`public view.” 964 F.3d at 1364. We do the same here. The
`district court did not perform the required analysis. That
`analysis is not for us to undertake in the first instance.
`Therefore, we vacate the Unsealing Order and remand for
`the district court to “make particularized determinations
`as to whether and, if so, to what extent” the third-party li-
`censing information raised by Finjan should be made pub-
`lic.1 Id.
`
`CONCLUSION
`For the above reasons, the appealed order is vacated
`and the case is remanded for further proceedings con-
`sistent with this opinion.
`VACATED AND REMANDED
`COSTS
`
`No costs.
`
`
`1 Our mere vacatur of the Unsealing Order will not
`have the effect of unsealing the currently sealed Daubert
`Order.
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket