Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 257 Filed 05/04/20 Page 1 of 6
`
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`D. Stuart Bartow (SBN 233107)
`Email: DSBartow@duanemorris.com
`Nicole E. Grigg (SBN 307733)
`2475 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1194
`Telephone: 650.847.4150
`Facsimile: 650.847.4151
`
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`Joseph A. Powers (PA SBN 84590)
`Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`japowers@duanemorris.com
`Jarrad M. Gunther (PA SBN 207038)
`Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`jmgunther@duanemorris.com
`30 South 17th Street
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Telephone: 215.979.1000
`Facsimile: 215.979.1020
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`SONICWALL INC.
`
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`Matthew C. Gaudet (GA SBN 287759)
`Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`mcgaudet@duanemorris.com
`Robin L. McGrath (GA SBN 493115)
`Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`rlmcgrath@duanemorris.com
`David C. Dotson (GA SBN 138040)
`Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`dcdotson@duanemorris.com
`Jennifer H. Forte (GA SBN 940650)
`Admitted Pro Hac Vice
`jhforte@duanemorris.com
`1075 Peachtree Street, Ste. 2000
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Telephone: 404.253.6900
`Facsimile: 404.253.6901
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`FINJAN, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`SONICWALL INC., a Delaware
`Corporation
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
` Case No. 5:17-cv-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`DEFENDANT SONICWALL INC.’S
`ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
`FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL
`
`
`
`SONICWALL’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
`CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`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
`
`

`

`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 257 Filed 05/04/20 Page 2 of 6
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-11 and 79-5, this Court’s Standing Civil Order Re: Civil Cases, the
`Parties Stipulated Protective Order (Dkt. 68), the Parties Stipulated Order Regarding Discovery of
`Electronically Stored Information (Dkt. 69), and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(5)(B),
`Defendant SonicWall Inc. (“SonicWall”) hereby moves the Court for leave to file under seal,
`pursuant to Civil L.R. 79-5(d)-(e), the items identified in the table below.
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`Document Title
`
`Portion(s) to Seal
`
`Reason(s) for Sealing
`
`Ex. 1
`
`Cisco Systems, Inc.
`Mutual Non-Disclosure
`Agreement dated
`January 19, 2004
`
`Entire Document
`
`Ex. 2
`
`Finjan Software Inc.
`Amended and Restated
`Investors’ Rights
`Agreement dated June
`2, 2004
`
`Entire Document
`
`The parties in Finjan,
`Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-
`BLF-SVK designated this
`document as “Highly
`Confidential –
`Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`pursuant to the
`Stipulated Protective
`Order. See Declaration
`of Jennifer Forte in
`Support of
`Administrative Motion
`to File Documents Under
`Seal (“Forte
`Declaration”), ¶¶ 2-4.
`
`The parties in Finjan,
`Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-
`BLF-SVK designated this
`document as “Highly
`Confidential –
`Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`pursuant to the
`Stipulated Protective
`Order. See Forte
`Declaration, ¶¶ 2-4.
`
`1
`SONICWALL’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
`CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`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
`
`

`

`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 257 Filed 05/04/20 Page 3 of 6
`
`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
`
`Ex. 3
`
`Ex. 4
`
`Entire Document
`
`Cisco – Finjan
`Holdings, Inc. Mutual
`Non-Disclosure
`Agreement dated March
`21, 2014
`
`Excerpts from the
`February 1, 2019
`Deposition of Yoav
`Samet
`
`Entire Document
`
`Ex. 5
`
`Excerpts from the April
`10, 2019 Deposition of
`Daniel Chinn
`
`Entire Document
`
`Ex. 6
`
`Exhibit 34 to the April
`10, 2019 deposition of
`Daniel Chinn
`
`Entire Document
`
`The parties in Finjan,
`Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-
`BLF-SVK designated this
`document as “Highly
`Confidential –
`Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`pursuant to the
`Stipulated Protective
`Order. See Forte
`Declaration, ¶¶ 2-4.
`
`The parties in Finjan,
`Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-
`BLF-SVK designated this
`document as “Highly
`Confidential –
`Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`pursuant to the
`Stipulated Protective
`Order. See Forte
`Declaration, ¶¶ 2-4.
`
`The parties in Finjan,
`Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-
`BLF-SVK designated this
`document as “Highly
`Confidential –
`Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`pursuant to the
`Stipulated Protective
`Order. See Forte
`Declaration, ¶¶ 2-4.
`
`The parties in Finjan,
`Inc. v. Cisco Systems,
`Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-
`BLF-SVK designated this
`document as “Highly
`Confidential –
`Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`pursuant to the
`Stipulated Protective
`Order. See Forte
`Declaration, ¶¶ 2-4.
`
`II.
`
`ARGUMENT
`A.
`Legal Standard
`There is a presumption of public access to judicial records and documents. Nixon v. Warner
`
`2
`SONICWALL’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
`CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`

`

`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 257 Filed 05/04/20 Page 4 of 6
`
`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
`
`Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978). However, records attached to non-dispositive motions,
`such is the case here, are not subject to the strong presumption of access. Finjan, Inc. v. Proofpoint,
`Inc, No. 13-CV-05808-HSG, 2015 WL 9023164, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2015) (internal citation
`omitted). Because the documents attached to non-dispositive motions “are often unrelated, or only
`tangentially related, to the underlying cause of action,” parties moving to seal must meet the lower
`“good cause” standard of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 26(c). Id. (internal quotation
`marks omitted). The “good cause” standard requires a “particularized showing” that “specific
`prejudice or harm will result” if the information is disclosed. Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen.
`Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted); see Fed.
`R. Civ. P. 26(c). “Broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated by specific examples of articulated
`reasoning” will not suffice. Beckman Indus., Inc. v. Int'l Ins. Co., 966 F.2d 470, 476 (9th Cir. 1992).
`Sealing is appropriate where the requesting party “establishes that the document, or portions
`thereof is privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise entitled to protection under the
`law.” N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 79–5(a). A party must “narrowly tailor” its request to sealable material
`only. Id.
`
`B.
`
`SonicWall’s Administrative Motion to Seal Is Supported By Good Cause and Is
`Narrowly Tailored
`
`SonicWall seeks to seal Exhibits 1-6 to the Declaration of Matthew Gaudet Pursuant to
`Interim Order Re: April 17, 2020 Joint Discovery Letter Brief at Dkt. 255 (“Gaudet Declaration”)
`because the parties in Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00072-BLF-SVK designated
`these documents as “Highly Confidential – Attorneys’ Eyes Only” pursuant to the Stipulated
`Protective Order.
`SonicWall contends that public disclosure of this information could cause harm to Finjan.
`Id.; see also Andrx Pharms., LLC v. GlaxoSmithKline, 236 F.R.D. 583, 586 (S.D. Fla. 2006) (“Courts
`dress technical information with a heavy cloak of judicial protection because of the threat of serious
`economic injury to the disclosure of scientific information.”); Network Appliance, Inc. v. Sun
`Microsys. Inc., 2010 WL 841274, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2010) (granting application to seal
`“information regarding NetApp’s internal usability testing of its software”).
`3
`SONICWALL’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
`CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`

`

`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 257 Filed 05/04/20 Page 5 of 6
`
`SonicWall’s administrative motion is narrowly tailored and only seeks to seal the select
`exhibits that contain the information designated as Highly Confidential - Attorneys’ Eyes Only. See
`Kowalsky v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 2012 WL 892427, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 14, 2012) (finding
`sealing appropriate where “[t]he proposed redactions contain[ed] . . . confidential product
`development information, the disclosure of which could harm [the defendant's] competitive
`advantage in the marketplace.”).
`III. CONCLUSION
`For these reasons, SonicWall respectfully requests that the Court grant its Administrative
`Motion to Seal.
`
`Dated: May 4, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Nicole E. Grigg
`
`
`Nicole E. Grigg (CA SBN 307733)
`negrigg@duanemorris.com
`DUANE MORRIS LLP
`D. Stuart Bartow (CA SBN 233107)
`dsbartow@duanemorris.com
`2475 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1194
`Telephone: 650.847.4146
`Facsimile: 650.847.4151
`
`
`Robin L. McGrath (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: rlmcgrath@duanemorris.com
`1075 Peachtree Street, Ste. 2000
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`Telephone: 404.253.6901
`Facsimile: 404.253.6901
`
`Matthew C. Gaudet (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: mcgaudet@duanemorris.com
`Robin L. McGrath (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: rlmcgrath@duanemorris.com
`David C. Dotson (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: dcdotson@duanemorris.com
`Jennifer H. Forte (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: jhforte@duanemorris.com
`1075 Peachtree Street, Ste. 2000
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`4
`SONICWALL’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
`CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`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
`
`

`

`Case 5:17-cv-04467-BLF Document 257 Filed 05/04/20 Page 6 of 6
`
`Telephone: 404.253.6901
`Facsimile: 404.253.6901
`
`Joseph A. Powers (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: japowers@duanemorris.com
`Jarrad M. Gunther (admitted pro hac vice)
`Email: jmgunther@duanemorris.com
`30 South 17th Street
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Telephone: 215.979.1000
`Facsimile: 215.979.1020
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`SONICWALL INC.
`
`5
`SONICWALL’S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL;
`CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-04467-BLF-VKD
`
`
`
`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
`
`