`
`Filed on behalf of Clearlamp, LLC
`By:
`
`Matthew L. Cutler (mcutler@hdp.com)
`
`
`Bryan K. Wheelock (bwheelock@hdp.com)
`
`
`Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC
`
`
`7700 Bonhomme, Suite 400
`
`
`St. Louis, MO 63105
`
`
`Tel: (314) 726-7500
`
`
`Fax: (314) 726-7501
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________
`
`LKQ CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CLEARLAMP, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`_____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
`Patent 7,297,364
`_____________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR ENTRY TO SEAL UNDER 37
`C.F.R. 42.54
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`On July 1, 2013, Patent Owner Clearlamp, LLC (“Clearlamp”) filed its
`
`
`
`
`Response,1 which was accompanied by evidentiary exhibits. On July 9, Petitioner
`
`LKQ filed its “Objections to Evidence Submitted by Clearlamp” (Paper No. 39).
`
`Contemporaneously with this motion, Clearlamp is filing supplemental
`
`evidence in response to LKQ’s evidentiary objections. Because some of the
`
`supplemental evidence contains information that LKQ has indicated is confidential
`
`business information, Clearlamp moves to seal those Exhibits, for good causes
`
`explained in more detail below. The Board previously granted Clearlamp
`
`permission to file a Motion to Seal in conjunction with its Patent Owner’s
`
`Response. (See Paper No. 29). Because the present motion seeks sealing of
`
`supplemental evidence in support of Clearlamp’s response, Clearlamp respectfully
`
`understands that the Board’s prior grant of permission to file a motion to seal
`
`extends to this motion as well.
`
`Specifically, Clearlamp requests that the following Exhibits be sealed:
`
`(1) the complete transcript of the deposition of Robert Sandau (Ex. 2021)2;
`
`
`1 Paper No. 33 is the redacted version of Clearlamp’s Response, and Paper No. 35
`
`is the full version.
`
`2 Patent Owner Clearlamp is also filing a redacted public version of the Sandau
`
`deposition transcript.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`(2) excerpts of the transcript of the deposition of James Devlin (Ex. 2024);
`
`
`
`and
`
`(3) the Supplemental Declaration of A. Harvey Bell, IV (Ex. 2025).
`
`Each of these documents are filed concurrently with this Motion.
`
`I.
`
`Good Cause Exists for Sealing Certain Confidential Information
`The Office Patent Trial Practice Guide provides that “the rules aim to strike
`
`a balance between the public’s interest in maintaining a complete and
`
`understandable file history and the parties’ interest in protecting truly sensitive
`
`information.” 77 FED. REG. 48756, 48760 (Aug. 14, 2012). Further, those rules
`
`“identify confidential information in a manner consistent with Federal Rule of
`
`Civil Procedure 26(c)(1)(G), which provides for protective orders for trade secret
`
`or other confidential research, development, or commercial information.” Id.
`
`(citing 37 C.F.R. § 42.54).
`
`Each of the exhibits summarized in Table 1 below (the “Proposed Sealed
`
`Exhibits”) contains information that LKQ maintains is sensitive and confidential
`
`business technical, financial, and/or strategy information of Petitioner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE 1 – Proposed Sealed Exhibits
`
`Exh.
`Nos.
`
`Summary of Contents
`
`Good Cause for Filing Under Seal
`
`2021 Complete transcript from
`
`Per LKQ, this document contains a non-
`
`the Deposition of Robert
`
`public discussion of LKQ’s confidential
`
`Sandau
`
`business activities and strategies
`
`concerning the portion of its business
`
`that is directed to refurbishing vehicle
`
`lamps and offering those lamps for sale.
`
`This information was also designated as
`
`confidential under the Protective Order
`
`entered by the district court in the
`
`underlying litigation. Further, with
`
`respect to Mr. Sandau’s deposition
`
`statements regarding the personality of
`
`LKQ personnel (41:10-13), Clearlamp
`
`understands that LKQ asserts those
`
`statements are personal confidential and
`
`have little relevance to the merits of any
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exh.
`Nos.
`
`Summary of Contents
`
`Good Cause for Filing Under Seal
`
`substantive issue, and that there would
`
`thus be no harm to the public’s interest
`
`in restricting access to statement's about
`
`someone’s personality
`
`2024
`
`Excerpts of the transcript of
`
`Mr. Devlin was LKQ’s Rule 30(b)(6)
`
`the deposition of James
`
`designee regarding financial topics in the
`
`Devlin (4:1–9:6; 26:1–
`
`underlying U.S. District Court litigation.
`
`27:10; 35:17-20; 37:3–
`
`These excerpts discuss the contents of
`
`39:12; and 42:12–46:12)
`
`Exhibit 2011 (LKQ004213; marked as
`
`Exhibit 3 in the deposition), which
`
`describe LKQ’s confidential sales
`
`information and related financial
`
`information regarding its accused
`
`process.
`
`2025
`
`Supplemental Declaration
`
`This Exhibit includes a Youtube.com
`
`of A. Harvey Bell, IV
`
`URL for a video describing LKQ’s lamp
`
`refurbishing process. LKQ asserts that
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exh.
`Nos.
`
`Summary of Contents
`
`Good Cause for Filing Under Seal
`
`this URL, and the underlying video, is
`
`non-public because the URL cannot be
`
`found by a keyword or other search (but
`
`rather is only accessible via a link or by
`
`typing in the exact URL into an internet
`
`browser) and because the video is not
`
`otherwise publicly available. LKQ
`
`further asserts that the process
`
`information shown in the video is
`
`proprietary and non-public.
`
`II. Certification of Non-Publication
`
`On behalf of Patent Owner, undersigned counsel certifies the information
`
`sought to be sealed by this Motion to Seal has not, to their knowledge and based on
`
`LKQ’s representations, been published or otherwise made public. Efforts to
`
`maintain the confidentiality of this information have been undertaken by Patent
`
`Owner and Petitioner in a related district court proceeding between the parties in
`
`the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (C.A. No. 1:12-cv-
`
`02533 JHL).
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`III. Conclusion
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`Accordingly, Clearlamp requests that the Exhibits 2021, 2024 and 2025 be
`
`sealed.
`
`Dated: July 23, 2013
`
`*********
`
`Respectfully submitted by:
`
`/Matthew L. Cutler/
`MATTHEW L. CUTLER, Reg. No. 43574
`BRYAN K. WHEELOCK, Reg. No. 31441
`HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, PLC
`7700 Bonhomme Ave., Suite 400
`St. Louis, MO 63105
`Telephone: (314) 726-7500
`Facsimile: (314) 726-7501
`mcutler@hdp.com
`bwheelock@hdp.com
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner,
`Clearlamp, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00020
` Patent 7,297,364
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.6 (e)(4)
`
`
`It is hereby certified that on this 23rd day of July, 2013, a copy of the
`
`foregoing document was served via electronic mail upon the following:
`
`Alan L. Barry
`Jason A. Engel
`Benjamin E. Weed
`K&L Gates LLP
`70 West Madison Street, Suite 3100
`Chicago, Illinois 60602
`Phone: (312) 372-1121
`Fax: (312) 827-8000
`alan.barry@klgates.com
`jason.engel@klgates.com
`benjamin.weed@klgates.com
`
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner, LKQ Corporation
`
`
`/Matthew L. Cutler/
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`61128780.2
`
`
`
`
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
