Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 200 Filed 03/15/17 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.15-cv-03295-BLF (SVK)
`
`
`
`ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
`DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO
`SEAL
`Re: Dkt. Nos. 188, 190, 195, 196
`
`FINJAN, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, LLC,
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`Before the Court are Finjan, Inc.’s Administrative Motions to Seal (Dkt. Nos. 188, 195)
`
`and Blue Coat Systems, LLC’s Administrative Motions to Seal (Dkt. Nos. 190, 196). Both
`
`parties’ motions seek to seal confidential technical information belonging to Blue Coat that the
`
`parties submitted to the Court in connection with Finjan’s discovery submissions seeking to
`
`compel depositions (Dkt. Nos. 189, 191, 193, 194, 197).
`
`Courts recognize a “general right to inspect and copy public records and documents,
`
`including judicial records and documents.” Kamakana v. City & Cnty. Of Honolulu, 447 F.3d
`
`1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Communs., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 & n.7
`
`(1978)). A request to seal court records therefore starts with a “strong presumption in favor of
`
`access.” Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178 (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d
`
`1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). The standard for overcoming the presumption of public access to
`
`court records depends on the purpose for which the records are filed with the court. A party
`
`seeking to seal court records relating to motions that are “more than tangentially related to the
`
`underlying cause of action” must demonstrate “compelling reasons” that support secrecy. Ctr. For
`
`Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016). For records attached to
`
`motions that re “not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits of the case,” the lower
`
`“good cause” standard of Rule 26(c) applies. Id.; see also Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179. A party
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 200 Filed 03/15/17 Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`moving to seal court records must also comply with the procedures established by Civil Local
`
`Rule 79-5.
`
`Here, the “good cause” standard applies because the information both Finjan and Blue
`
`Coat seek to seal was submitted to the Court in connection with submissions concerning a
`
`discovery dispute, rather than a motion that concerns the merits of the case. Having considered
`
`the Motions, the declarations submitted in support thereof, the pleadings on file, and the parties’
`
`efforts to narrowly tailor their sealing requests to specific items of technical information, the
`
`Motions are hereby granted in part and denied in part.
`
`a. Request denied in part as to the term “NSE”
`
`Finjan’s request to seal portions of its Statement of Discovery Dispute (Dkt. No. 189) and
`
`Supplemental Submission Re: Statement of Discovery Dispute (Dkt. No. 193) is granted in part
`
`and denied in part. Finjan’s filings redacted portions related to an allegedly confidential “static
`
`scanning” component of Blue Coat’s accused Malware Analysis Appliance (“MAA”) product
`
`titled “NSE.” In its Motion to Seal, Finjan indicates that it redacted the term because Blue Coat
`
`had designated the information as confidential during the course of discovery. (Dkt. No. 188-1 at
`
`¶¶ 3-4.) The Court does not question the truth of this assertion. However, in Blue Coat’s
`
`Statement of Discovery Dispute and its Further Statement of Discovery Dispute, Blue Coat asserts
`
`that MAA’s static scanning function is disclosed in publicly available documents. (Dkt. No. 191
`
`at 1.) Further, Blue Coat did not redact the NSE term in its own filings. (Dkt. Nos. 191 at 1, 197
`
`at 2.) Therefore, the Court concludes there is not good cause to seal the NSE term or its
`
`description, and the request to seal as to the term NSE is denied. Finjan is instructed to refile only
`
`its Statement of Discovery Dispute (Dkt. No. 189) and its Supplemental Submission re: Statement
`
`of Discovery Dispute (Dkt. No. 193), with the following portions unredacted: Dkt. No. 189 at
`1:16-18; 1:21-24; 2:8-9; 2:13. Dkt. No. 193 at 1:6; 1:15; 2:18; 2:20.1
`
`
`1 Finjan does not need to refile its exhibits.
`
`2
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 200 Filed 03/15/17 Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`b. Remaining requests to seal are granted
`
`The Court concludes that good cause has been shown to seal the following materials and
`
`that counsel for Finjan and Blue Coat may file the following materials under seal:
`
`1. ECF 188
`Document
`Text to be Sealed
`
`Redacted portions at 2:10-
`12, and 2:16-17.
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Finjan’s Statement
`of Discovery
`Dispute
`
`Exhibit 1 (Excerpts
`of Rohan
`Deposition
`Transcript)
`Exhibit 2 (Excerpts
`of the Rough
`Ahlander
`Deposition
`Transcript)
`
`
`Basis for Sealing Portion of Document
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential information regarding products
`and functionality, operation, architecture,
`and development thereof, including
`reference to portions of Blue Coat’s source
`code (“technical information”).
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`2. ECF 190
`Document
`Text to be Sealed
`
`Blue Coat’s
`Statement of
`Discovery Dispute
`
`Redacted portions at 2:7-8;
`2:9; 2:14
`
`Basis for Sealing Portion of Document
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential information regarding products
`and functionality, operation, architecture,
`and development thereof, including
`reference to portions of Blue Coat’s source
`code (“technical information”).
`
`
`
`
`3. ECF No. 195
`Document
`Text to be Sealed
`Redacted portions at, 1:8-
`10; 1:12; 2:1-9; 2:26-28;
`3:4-11; 3:13; 3:15-25; 4:1;
`4:4-5; 4:8-9; 4:13-14; 4:18-
`21; 5:1-3; 5:12-14; 5:19-
`24; 6:25-28; 7:1-28
`
`Finjan’s
`Supplemental
`Submission re:
`Statement of
`Discovery Dispute
`
`Basis for Sealing Portion of Document
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential information regarding products
`and functionality, operation, architecture,
`and development thereof, including
`reference to portions of Blue Coat’s source
`code (“technical information”).
`
`
`3
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 200 Filed 03/15/17 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`4
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Exhibit 2 (Relevant
`Portions of Finjan’s
`Infringement
`Contentions, Appx
`C-1)
`Exhibit 3 (Excerpts
`of Rohan
`Deposition
`Transcript)
`Exhibit 4
`(BC2_SC_000664-
`683)
`Exhibit 5
`(BC2_SC_000684-
`686)
`Exhibit 6 (Excerpts
`of Rough Runald
`Deposition
`Transcript)
`Exhibit 7 (Relevant
`Portions of Finjan’s
`Infringement
`Contentions, Appx
`F-2)
`Exhibit 8
`(BC00098119-
`0098135)
`Exhibit 9 (BC-
`0057567-0057573)
`
`Exhibit 10 (BC-
`0070407-0070410)
`
`Exhibit 11 (BC-
`0078972-0078976)
`
`Exhibit 12 (BC2-
`0155109-015515)
`
`Exhibit 13 (BC-
`188266-1888268)
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`United States District Court
`
`

`

`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 200 Filed 03/15/17 Page 5 of 5
`
`Basis for Sealing Portion of Document
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential information regarding products
`and functionality, operation, architecture,
`and development thereof, including
`reference to portions of Blue Coat’s source
`code (“technical information”).
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`References to Blue Coat’s highly
`confidential technical information.
`
`
`
`
`4. ECF No. 196
`Document
`Text to be Sealed
`
`Redacted portions at 2:11-
`12; 3:9-13; 4:22; 4:25-27;
`5:2; 5:4-6; 5:17-24; 5:28;
`6:1; 6:3; 6:5-7; 6:9-12;
`6:26; 9:20-23.
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Entire exhibit
`
`Blue Coat’s Further
`Statement of
`Discovery Dispute
`
`Exhibit A (Relevant
`Portions of Finjan’s
`Infringement
`Contentions, Appx
`C-1)
`Exhibit B (Relevant
`Portions of Finjan’s
`Infringement
`Contentions, Appx
`F-2)
`Exhibit C (Excerpts
`of Rohan
`Deposition
`Transcript)
`Exhibit D (Excerpts
`of Rough Runald
`Deposition
`Transcript)
`Exhibit G
`(BC00098119-
`0098121)
`
`
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: March 15, 2017
`
`
`
`
`SUSAN VAN KEULEN
`United States Magistrate Judge
`
`
`
`5
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Northern District of California
`United States District Court
`
`