`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN LOCATION-SHARING
`SYSTEMS, RELATED SOFTWARE,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`
`ORDER NO. 14:
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1347
`
`
`GRANTING COMPLAINANTS’ AND RESPONDENTS’ JOINT
`UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ADDENDUM TO THE
`PROTECTIVE ORDER REGARDING SOURCE CODE
`
`(May 12, 2023)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`On May 2, 2022, Complainants AGIS Software Development LLC and Advanced Ground
`
`Information Systems, Inc. (“Complainants” or “AGIS”) and Respondents Google LLC
`
`(“Google”); ASUSTeK Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer International (“ASUS”); BLU
`
`Products, Inc. (“BLU”); HMD Global, HMD Global OY, and HMD America, Inc. (“HMD”);
`
`Kyocera Corporation (“Kyocera”); Lenovo Group Ltd., Lenovo (United States) Inc., and Motorola
`
`Mobility LLC (“Lenovo”); OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd (“OnePlus”); Panasonic
`
`Holdings Corporation and Panasonic Corporation of North America (“Panasonic”); Samsung
`
`Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”); Sony Corporation and
`
`Sony Mobile Communications, Inc. (“Sony”); TCL Technology Group Corporation, TCL
`
`Communication Technology Holdings Limited, TCL Electronics Holdings Limited, and TCT
`
`Mobile (US) Inc. (“TCL”); and Xiaomi Corporation, Xiaomi H.K. Ltd., Xiaomi Communications
`
`Co., Ltd., and Xiaomi Inc. (“Xiaomi”) (all collectively, “Respondents”) filed a joint, unopposed
`
`motion to enter an addendum to the protective order (Motion 1347-005).
`
`The amended protective order added paragraph 18 governing the discovery of source code.
`
`The parties explained that their source code “constitutes highly valuable, confidential, and
`
`
`
`proprietary information.” Mot. 1347-005 at 2. They asserted that good cause exists to provide
`
`additional protection to the source code at issue in this investigation. Id. at 2–3. I find that good
`
`cause exists to allow paragraph 18 to govern the discovery of source code and grant the joint
`
`motion in part as it relates to paragraph 18.
`
`The amended protective order also added paragraph 19, which provided a prosecution bar.
`
`During a case management conference held on May 10, 2023, Respondents and Staff explained
`
`that good cause existed for a prosecution bar because a prosecution bar exists in parallel district
`
`court litigation between the parties and because of concerns that absent a prosecution bar order,
`
`there may later be disputes about prosecution of related patents by attorneys who have appeared
`
`this investigation. EDIS Doc. No. 796188 (May 10, 2023 Case Management Conference Tr.) at
`
`31:13-24, 32:14-33:6. Source code review is also set to begin shortly, and the timeline for review
`
`is limited. Id. at 33:24-34:7. Under the circumstances, and because this is a joint, unopposed
`
`motion, I find that good cause exists for the requested prosecution bar.
`
`An amended protective order with the parties’ requested Paragraphs 18 and 19 will be
`
`separately entered on EDIS.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
