Case 3:21-cv-00812-TWR-JLB Document 311 Filed 06/12/23 PageID.14909 Page 1 of 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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
` Case No.: 21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED
`MOTIONS TO FILE DOCUMENTS
`UNDER SEAL
`
`(ECF Nos. 289, 297)
`
`Defendant.
`
`TACTION TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`APPLE INC.,
`
`
`
`Presently before the Court are Plaintiff Taction Technology, Inc.’s (“Pl.’s Mot.,”
`ECF No. 289) and Defendant Apple Inc.’s (“Def.’s Mot.,” ECF No. 297) (together, the
`“Motions to Seal”) unopposed motions to file certain documents under seal. Specifically,
`Taction seeks to file under seal nearly 500 pages comprising Exhibits A (excerpts of
`Dr. Zinn’s opening report), B (excerpts of Dr. Visell’s opening report), C (excerpts of
`Dr. Knox’s report), D (excerpts of Taction’s response to Apple’s Interrogatory No. 15), E
`(excerpts of Exhibit A1 to Apple’s post-claim construction invalidity contentions), F
`(excerpts of Exhibit A2 to Apple’s post-claim construction invalidity contentions), G
`through I (Apple documents related to the iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 Plus), K (excerpts of
`Dr. Knox’s deposition transcript), L (excerpts of Arman Hajati deposition transcript), and
`M through R (Apple documents related to the iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 Plus), as well as those
`portions of its memorandum of points and authorities in support of its Daubert motion that
`
`1
`
`21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-00812-TWR-JLB Document 311 Filed 06/12/23 PageID.14910 Page 2 of 3
`
`
`cite and discuss those exhibits.1 (See Pl.’s Mot. at 1, 3–5; ECF No. 289-1 (“Snyder Decl.”)
`¶¶ 2–11; compare ECF No. 291 (redacted publicly filed documents), with ECF No. 290
`(lodged sealed documents).) Taction contends that there are “compelling reasons” to file
`these documents under seal because they contain “confidential information about . . .
`[Apple’s] business practices that would harm Apple’s competitive standing if made
`publicly available” and “sensitive and confidential business information about Taction.”
`(See Pl.’s Mot. at 2–5; Snyder Decl. ¶¶ 2–11.)
`For its part, Apple seeks to file under seal approximately 630 pages, consisting of
`Exhibits 1 (excerpts of Dr. Zinn’s rebuttal report), 2 (excerpts of Dr. Oliver’s corrected
`report), 4 (excerpts of Jere Harrison deposition transcript), 7 (excerpts of Taction’s post-
`claim construction amended infringement contentions), 8 (‘885 patent infringement claim
`chart for Apple iPhone SE), 12 (Taction’s infringement contentions), 13 (an Apple
`manual), 14 (an Apple document), 17 (excerpts of Dr. Ma’s deposition transcript), 20
`(excerpts of Alex Lee’s deposition transcript), 23 (‘885 patent infringement claim chart for
`Apple iPhone 14), 28 (excerpts of Taction’s response to an Apple interrogatory),2 29 (a
`February 8, 2023 production letter served by Apple to Taction), 30 (‘885 patent
`infringement claim chart for Apple iPhone 8 and 2020 iPhone SE), 31 (‘885 patent
`infringement claim chart for Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max), 32 (‘885 patent infringement
`claim chart for Apple Watch Series 8 41mm), 34 (excerpts of Dr. Kennedy’s amended
`opening expert report), and 35 (excerpts of Dr. Kennedy’s deposition transcript),3 in
`addition to portions of its memorandum of points and authorities in support of its motion
`for summary judgment and Daubert motion.4 (See Def.’s Mot. at 1; ECF No. 297-1 (“Tio
`
`
`1 Specifically, Taction seeks to file under seal the entirety of Exhibits A, C, G, H, I, and L through R;
`essentially the entirety of Exhibit E; and portions of Exhibits B, D, F, K and its memorandum.
`
` 2
`
` The Court notes that Apple’s Exhibit 28 is illegible as currently filed.
`
`3 The Court notes that Apple’s Exhibit 35’s slipsheet is miscaptioned as Exhibit 26.
`
` 4
`
` Specifically, Apple seeks to file under seal the entirety of Exhibits 4, 13, 14, and 17, and portions of
`Exhibits 1, 2, 7, 8, 12, 20, 23, 28 through 32, 34, and 35 and its memorandum.
`
`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
`
`2
`
`21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`

`

`Case 3:21-cv-00812-TWR-JLB Document 311 Filed 06/12/23 PageID.14911 Page 3 of 3
`
`
`Decl.”) ¶¶ 2–10); compare ECF Nos. 299–301 (redacted publicly filed documents), with
`ECF No. 298 (lodged sealed documents).) Apple argues that there exist compelling reasons
`to file these documents under seal because they “contain[] Taction’s, Apple’s, and third
`party sensitive confidential business information.” (See Def.’s Mot. at 1; Tio Decl.
`¶¶ 2–10.)
`Upon a close review of the Parties’ proposed redactions, the Court concludes that
`the Parties have demonstrated compelling reasons to file under seal Taction’s Exhibits A,
`C, G, H, I, and L through R and Apple’s Exhibits 4, 13, 14, and 17 in their entirety, as well
`as portions of Taction’s Exhibits B, D through F, K and its memorandum and Apple’s
`Exhibits 1, 2, 7, 8, 12, 20, 23, 28 through 32, 34, and 35 and its memorandum. See, e.g.,
`Orthopaedic Hosp. v. Encore Med., L.P., No. 19-CV-970 JLS (AHG), 2021 WL 1966121,
`at *2 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 12, 2021). The Court therefore GRANTS Taction’s (ECF No. 289)
`and Apple’s (ECF No. 297) Motions to Seal, and the Clerk of Court SHALL FILE
`UNDER SEAL the documents previously lodged under seal at ECF Nos. 290 and 298.
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`Dated: June 12, 2023
`
`
`
`_____________________________
`Honorable Todd W. Robinson
`United States District Judge
`
`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
`
`3
`
`21-CV-812 TWR (JLB)
`
`