Attorney Docket No. FABO-024/00US
`(309101-2031)
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. Patent No. 5,832,494
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`
`FACEBOOK, INC., LINKEDIN CORP., and TWITTER, INC.,
`Petitioners
`v.
`
`SOFTWARE RIGHTS ARCHIVES, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00479
`Patent No. 5,832,494
`Title: METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INDEXING, SEARCHING
`AND DISPLAYING DATA
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS’ MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`806426.01
`
`
`(309101-2031)
`
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. Patent No. 5,832,494
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________
`
`FACEBOOK, INC., LINKEDIN CORP., and TWITTER, INC.,
`Petitioners
`v.
`
`SOFTWARE RIGHTS ARCHIVES, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2013-00479
`Patent No. 5,832,494
`Title: METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INDEXING, SEARCHING
`AND DISPLAYING DATA
`
`
`
`PETITIONERS’ MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`806426.01
`
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.54, Petitioners, Facebook, Inc., LinkedIn Corp.,
`
`and Twitter, Inc. (“Petitioners”) respectfully submit this Motion to Seal Exhibit
`
`1236 (“the Exhibit”), Transcript of Deposition of Amy N. Langville, Ph. D. dated
`
`August 15, 2014 (“Langville Transcript”). Ms. Langville was retained as a
`
`consultant by the Patent Owner, Software Rights Archive, LLC. Patent Owner has
`
`designated the Langville Transcript as “CONFIDENTIAL” due to purported third-
`
`party confidential information.
`
`II. Applicable Legal Principles for Sealing Confidential Information
`
`
`
`There is a strong public policy for making all information filed in a quasi-
`
`judicial administrative proceeding open to the public, especially in an inter partes
`
`review which determines the patentability of claims in a patent and therefore
`
`affects the rights of the public. St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v.
`
`Volcano Corp., IPR2013-00258, Decision to Revised Motion to Seal 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§ 42.14 and 42.54, Paper 28 at 2. Under 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(1), the default rule is
`
`that all papers filed in an inter partes review are open and available for access by
`
`the public; and a party may file a concurrent motion to seal and the information at
`
`issue is sealed pending the outcome of the motion. Id.
`
`
`
`It is, however, only “confidential information” that is protected from
`
`disclosure. 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(7) (“The Director shall prescribe regulations -- …
`
`806426.01
`
`1
`
`
`
`providing for protective orders governing the exchange and submission of
`
`confidential information”). Id. In that regard, the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48760 (Aug. 14, 2012), provides:
`
`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.
`
`* * *
`
`Confidential Information: The 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. §
`42.54.
`
`
`
`The standard for granting a motion to seal is “for good cause.” 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.54. Petitioners, as moving parties, have the burden of proof in showing
`
`entitlement to the requested relief. Id.
`
`III. Good Cause Exists for Sealing Exhibit 1034
`
`
`
`Petitioners are submitting the Langville Transcript to support arguments
`
`made in reply to the Patent Owner’s Response to the Decision Instituting Inter
`
`Partes Review. Patent Owner has designed the transcript as confidential.
`
`Accordingly, to avoid any public disclosure of potentially confidential information,
`
`Petitioners submit that sealing the Exhibit is appropriate.
`
`
`
`806426.01
`
`2
`
`
`
`IV. Certification of Non-Publication
`
`
`
`Petitioners certify that the Exhibit has not been publicly disclosed, to the
`
`best of Petitioners’ knowledge.
`
`V. Certification of Conference with Opposing Parties Pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.54
`
`
`
`Petitioners certify that counsel for Patent Owner conferred with counsel for
`
`Petitioners during the deposition of Ms. Langville when Patent Owner designated
`
`the Langville Transcript as confidential. Petitioners reserve the right to seek to de-
`
`designate confidentiality where appropriate.
`
`VI. Proposed Protective Order
`
`
`
`Petitioners propose that the same Protective Order previously submitted by
`
`Patent Owner in this proceeding (Paper 32) would apply here.
`
`VII. Conclusion
`
`
`
`For the above reasons, Petitioners respectfully request that the Exhibit herein
`
`be treated as confidential information and be filed under seal.
`
`DATED: September 5, 2014
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTN: Heidi L. Keefe
`Patent Docketing
`1299 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
`Suite 700
`Washington, D.C. 20004
`Tel: 650-843-5001
`Fax: 650-849-7400
`
`
`/Heidi L. Keefe/
`Heidi L. Keefe
`Reg. No. 40,673
`Counsel for Petitioners Facebook, Inc.,
`LinkedIn Corp., and Twitter Inc.
`
`
`806426.01
`
`3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing
`
`PETITIONERS’ MOTION TO SEAL was served on September 5, 2014 by
`
`electronic mail directed to the attorneys of record at the following addresses:
`
`Lead and Backup Counsel for Patent
`Owner
`
`
`
`/Heidi L. Keefe/
`Heidi L. Keefe
`Reg. No. 40,673
`Counsel for Petitioners Facebook, Inc.,
`LinkedIn Corp., and Twitter Inc.
`
`
`Martin M. Zoltick
`Nancy J. Linck
`Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.
`607 14th St., N.W., Suite 800
`Washington, DC 20005
`Service Email: SRA-IPR@rfem.com
`
`
`
`
`806426.01
`
`1
`
`
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
