Case 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 635 Filed 10/05/20 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`Case No. 18-md-02834-BLF
`
`
`ORDER GRANTING IN PART
`ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
`SEAL AT ECF 611
`
`[Re: ECF 611]
`
`
`Case No.: 5:18-cv-00767-BLF
`
`[Re: ECF 194]
`
`
`
`
`Case No.: 5:18-cv-05619-BLF
`
`[Re: ECF 98]
`
`IN RE: PERSONALWEB
`TECHNOLOGIES, LLC ET AL., PATENT
`LITIGATION
`
`AMAZON.COM, INC., and AMAZON
`WEB SERVICES, INC.,
`
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`v.
`
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`and LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`
`
`Defendants,
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`a Texas limited liability company, and
`LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, a
`Delaware limited liability company,
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`
`TWITCH INTERACTIVE, INC. a Delaware
`corporation,
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`Before the Court is the administrative motion of Amazon.com, Inc., and Amazon Web
`
`Services, Inc. (collectively, “Amazon”), and Twitch Interactive, Inc. (“Twitch”) to file under seal
`
`portions of their Reply in Support of Motion for Attorney Fees and Cost (ECF 612), as well as
`
`several accompanying exhibits. For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS the motion IN
`
`PART.
`
`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 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 635 Filed 10/05/20 Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`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 & Cty. 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)). Accordingly, when considering a sealing request, “a ‘strong presumption in favor
`
`of access’ is the starting point.” Id. (quoting Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122,
`
`1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). Parties seeking to seal judicial records relating to motions that are “more
`
`than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action” bear the burden of overcoming the
`
`presumption with “compelling reasons” that outweigh the general history of access and the public
`
`policies favoring disclosure. Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir.
`
`2016); Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178–79.
`
`Parties moving to seal documents must also comply with the procedures established by Civ.
`
`L.R. 79-5. Pursuant to Civ. L.R. 79-5(b), a sealing order is appropriate only upon a request that
`
`establishes the document is “sealable,” or “privileged or protectable as a trade secret or otherwise
`
`entitled to protection under the law.” “The request must be narrowly tailored to seek sealing only
`
`of sealable material, and must conform with Civil L.R. 79-5(d).” Civ. L.R. 79-5(b). In part, Civ.
`
`L.R. 79-5(d) requires the submitting party to attach a “proposed order that is narrowly tailored to
`
`seal only the sealable material” which “lists in table format each document or portion thereof that is
`
`sought to be sealed,” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(b), and an “unredacted version of the document” that
`
`indicates “by highlighting or other clear method, the portions of the document that have been
`
`omitted from the redacted version.” Civ. L.R. 79-5(d)(1)(d). “Within 4 days of the filing of the
`
`Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, the Designating Party must file a declaration as required
`
`by subsection 79-5(d)(1)(A) establishing that all of the designated material is sealable.” Civ. L.R.
`
`79-5(e)(1).
`
`II. DISCUSSION
`
`The Court has reviewed Amazon and Twitch’s sealing motion and the declaration of the
`
`designating party submitted in support thereof. The Court finds that the parties have articulated
`
`compelling reasons to seal the requested documents. The Court’s rulings on the sealing request is
`
`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 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 635 Filed 10/05/20 Page 3 of 5
`
`Reasoning
`
`Portions of the Reply reference
`or describe documents designated
`as “Highly Confidential –
`Attorney’s
`Eyes Only” by PersonalWeb.
`Declaration of Ravi R. Ranganath
`(“Ranganath Decl.”) ¶¶ 2, 3, ECF
`611-1.
`
`PersonalWeb requests that the Court
`maintain under seal only Exhibits 1
`and 10 to the Gregorian Declaration
`and the portions of the Reply that
`reference or describe the contents of
`Exhibits 1 and 10, found in the
`Reply at 12:12-21. Declaration of
`Viviana Boero Hedrick (“Hedrick
`Decl.”) ¶¶ 3-6, ECF 633.
`
`PersonalWeb has designated this
`document as “Highly Confidential
`– Attorney’s Eyes Only.”
`Ranganath Decl. ¶¶ 2, 3.
`
`This exhibit contains excerpts of the
`deposition
`transcript
`of
`PersonalWeb’s
`Non-Executive
`Chairman, Kevin Bermeister. In this
`testimony, Mr. Bermeister provides
`non-public and sensitive financial
`information describing settlements
`negotiations
`and
`licensing
`agreements entered into between
`PersonalWeb and third parties that
`are not part of this MDL proceeding,
`and that relate to the resolution of
`cases that also were never a part of
`this MDL proceeding. Hedrick Decl.
`¶¶ 3-6
`PersonalWeb has designated this
`document as “Highly Confidential
`– Attorney’s Eyes Only.”
`Ranganath Decl. ¶¶ 2, 3.
`
`
`
`set forth in the table below.
`
`
`
`ECF
`No.
`ECF 611-
`4
`
`Document to be Sealed
`
`Result
`
`Amazon’s and Twitch’s
`Reply in Support of
`Motion for Attorney Fees
`and Costs (“Reply”)
`
`GRANTED as
`to 12:12-21
`
`
`
`GRANTED as
`to the entire
`document.
`
`ECF 611-
`5
`
`Exhibit 1 to the Reply
`Declaration of Todd
`Gregorian in support of
`the Reply (“Gregorian
`Declaration”)
`
`Excerpts of the August 22,
`2019 deposition testimony
`of Kevin Bermeister
`
`ECF 611-
`6
`
`Exhibit 9 to the Gregorian
`Declaration
`
`
`DENIED
`
`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 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 635 Filed 10/05/20 Page 4 of 5
`
`Reasoning
`
`
`
`The designating party,
`PersonalWeb, does not seek to seal
`this document. See Hedrick Decl. ¶
`4.
`PersonalWeb has designated this
`document as “Highly Confidential
`– Attorney’s Eyes Only.”
`Ranganath Decl. ¶¶ 2, 3.
`
`the Gregorian
`to
`Exhibit 10
`a
`settlement
`is
`Declaration
`agreement between PersonalWeb
`and VigLink that was designated as
`“Highly Confidential – Attorneys’
`Eyes Only” under the Stipulated
`Protective Order. This is a settlement
`agreement between PersonalWeb
`and an entity that is not now and was
`never a party
`to
`this MDL
`proceeding. Additionally,
`this
`settlement
`agreement
`contains
`highly
`sensitive
`financial
`information as it discloses revenue
`information belonging to Viglink,
`which is confidential information
`that PersonalWeb agreed to maintain
`as confidential under the terms of
`that settlement agreement. Hedrick
`Decl. ¶¶ 3-6.
`PersonalWeb has designated this
`document as “Highly Confidential
`– Attorney’s Eyes Only.”
`Ranganath Decl. ¶¶ 2, 3.
`
`The designating party,
`PersonalWeb, does not seek to seal
`this document. See Hedrick Decl. ¶
`4.
`PersonalWeb has designated this
`document as “Highly Confidential
`– Attorney’s Eyes Only.”
`Ranganath Decl. ¶¶ 2, 3.
`
`The designating party,
`PersonalWeb, does not seek to seal
`
`
`
`ECF
`No.
`
`Document to be Sealed
`
`Result
`
`January 25, 2018 emails
`between PersonalWeb and
`its counsel.
`
`ECF 611-
`7
`
`Exhibit 10 to the
`Gregorian Declaration
`
`Patent and licensing
`settlement agreement
`concerning the patents-in-
`suit
`
`GRANTED as
`to the entire
`document.
`
`DENIED
`
`ECF 611-
`8
`
`Exhibit 11 to the
`Gregorian Declaration
`
`June 2015 letter from
`PersonalWeb’s counsel to
`an accused infringer of the
`patents-in-suit
`
`ECF 611-
`9
`
`Exhibit 13 to the
`Gregorian Declaration
`
`Emails between
`PersonalWeb’s counsel
`and counsel for an
`accused infringer of the
`
`DENIED
`
`4
`
`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 5:18-md-02834-BLF Document 635 Filed 10/05/20 Page 5 of 5
`
`
`
`ECF
`No.
`
`Document to be Sealed
`
`Result
`
`patents-in-suit from
`January to March 2018
`
`III.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`Reasoning
`
`this document. See Hedrick Decl. ¶
`4.
`
`For the foregoing reasons, the Court hereby GRANTS IN PART Amazon and Twitch’s
`
`administrative motion to seal at ECF 611. Amazon and Twitch shall file a revised redacted version
`
`of their Reply, and public versions of Exhibits 9, 11, and 13 to the Gregorian Declaration within one
`
`week of this order.
`
`
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`Dated: October 5, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`______________________________________
`BETH LABSON FREEMAN
`United States District 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
`
`