Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 85 Filed 08/17/16 Page 1 of 3
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`Case No. 15-cv-03295-BLF
`
`
`
`ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS TO
`SEAL
`
`[Re: ECF 70, 80]
`
`
`
`FINJAN, INC.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`BLUE COAT SYSTEMS, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`Before the Court are the parties’ administrative motions to file under seal portions of their
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`briefing and exhibits. ECF 70, 80. For the reasons stated below, the motions are GRANTED.
`
`I. LEGAL STANDARD
`
` “Historically, courts have recognized a ‘general right to inspect and copy public records
`
`and documents, including judicial records and documents.’” Kamakana v. City and Cnty. of
`
`Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (quoting Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435
`
`U.S. 589, 597 & n.7 (1978)). Consequently, access to motions and their attachments that are
`
`“more than tangentially related to the merits of a case” may be sealed only upon a showing of
`
`“compelling reasons” for sealing. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092,
`
`1101–02 (9th Cir. 2016). Filings that are only tangentially related to the merits may be sealed
`
`upon a lesser showing of “good cause.” Id. at 1097.
`
`
`
`In addition, sealing motions filed in this district must be “narrowly tailored to seek sealing
`
`only of sealable material.” Civil L.R. 79-5(b). A party moving to seal a document in whole or in
`
`part must file a declaration establishing that the identified material is “sealable.” Civ. L.R. 79-
`
`5(d)(1)(A). “Reference to a stipulation or protective order that allows a party to designate certain
`
`documents as confidential is not sufficient to establish that a document, or portions thereof, are
`
`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 85 Filed 08/17/16 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`
`sealable.” Id.
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`
`
`
`The Court has reviewed the parties’ sealing motions and respective declarations in support
`
`thereof. The Court finds the parties have articulated compelling reasons to seal the submitted
`
`documents. The proposed redactions are also narrowly tailored. The Court’s rulings on the
`
`sealing request are set forth in the tables below:
`
`A. ECF 70
`Identification of Documents
`to be Sealed
`Plaintiff Finjan, Inc.’s Notice
`of Motion and Motion for
`Preliminary Injunction
`Pursuant to Rule 65
`(“Motion”) at Page 2, l. 24;
`page 10, ll. 26-28; page 11, ll.
`1, 3-4, 6-7, 11-20, 27; page 12,
`ll. 1-6, 20-22, 27; page 13, ll.
`1-7; page 23, ll. 9-16.
`Declaration of Dr. Eric Cole in
`Support of Finjan’s Motion
`(“Cole Decl.”) at Page 10, ll.
`15-22; page 16, ll. 1-10, 15-18,
`19, 22; page 12, ll. 20-21, page
`13, ll. 1-7, 12-23; page 14, ll.
`12-16; page 15, ll. 18, 24, 26;
`page 16, ll. 1-3, 19-27; page
`17, ll. 1-12, 18-27; page 18, ll.
`1-15, 18, 22-23; page 19, ll. 1-
`7, 9, 11-16; page 20, ll. 4-19;
`page 21, ll. 1-12, 18-20, 25-26;
`page 22, ll. 1-8, 22-26; page
`23, ll. 1-7, 20-23.
`Exhibit 29 to Andre Decl.
`
`Exhibit 30 to Andre Decl. at
`Pages 37, 51.
`
`Exhibit 34 to Andre Decl.
`
`Exhibit 35 to Andre Decl.
`
`Exhibit 36 to Andre Decl.
`
`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
`
`Description of Documents
`
`Court’s Order
`
`Blue Coat’s confidential
`technical and business
`information
`
`GRANTED
`
`GRANTED
`
`Reference to highly
`confidential Blue Coat
`information regarding products
`and functionality, operation,
`architecture, and development
`thereof, including reference to
`portions of Blue Coat’s source
`code
`
`GRANTED
`
`GRANTED
`
`GRANTED
`
`Highly confidential Blue Coat
`information regarding Blue
`Coat’s marketing and
`financials
`Highly confidential
`information regarding Blue
`Coat’s business and financials
`Highly confidential Blue Coat
`information regarding Blue
`Coat’s trade secret and
`technology
`Highly confidential Blue Coat
`information regarding Blue
`Coat’s trade secret and
`technology
`Highly confidential Blue Coat GRANTED
`
`GRANTED
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 5:15-cv-03295-BLF Document 85 Filed 08/17/16 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`
`Exhibit 47 to Andre Decl.
`
`Exhibit 54 to Andre Decl. in its
`entirety
`
`B. ECF 80
`Identification of Documents
`to be Sealed
`Exhibits 1-4 to the Declaration
`of Yuridia Caire in
`Support of Finjan’s Opposition
`to Blue Coat’s Administrative
`Motion for Expedited
`Discovery and Continuance of
`the Briefing Schedule and
`Finjan’s Cross-Motion for
`Expedited Hearing, in their
`entirety
`Exhibits 7 to the Declaration of
`Yuridia Caire
`
`III. ORDER
`
`information regarding Blue
`Coat’s trade secret and
`technology
`Highly confidential Blue Coat
`information regarding Blue
`Coat’s products and services
`Discloses Finjan’s confidential
`business and financial
`information.
`
`GRANTED
`
`GRANTED.
`
`Description of Documents
`
`Court’s Order
`
`Discloses Finjan’s confidential
`information concerning
`Finjan’s business, products and
`technical informa
`
`GRANTED
`
`Discloses Finjan’s confidential
`information concerning
`Finjan’s business, licensees,
`products and technical
`information.
`
`GRANTED
`
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the sealing motions at ECF 70 and 80 are GRANTED.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED
`
`Dated: August 17, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` ______________________________________
`BETH LABSON FREEMAN
`United States District Judge
`
`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