`
`
`
`Paper No. __
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`BROADCOM CORPORATION
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET L.M. ERICSSON
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00602
`U.S. Patent No. 6,466,568
`
`
`
`
`
`MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756621v.1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.14, Petitioner Broadcom Corporation
`
`(“Broadcom”) requests permission to seal Ericsson’s Emergency Motion for Relief
`
`from the Protective Order, Case 6:10-cv-473 (E.D. Tex., March 8, 2013) (Exhibit
`
`1019).
`
`
`
`The Board’s Decision Denying Ericsson’s Motion for Additional Discovery
`
`(Paper No. 21) (“the Decision”) stated that “Broadcom should clarify if Exhibit
`
`1018 is to be placed under seal. It appears, based on the face of the document and
`
`related characterizations, that it contains confidential information. It is under seal
`
`at PTAB at this time.” Decision at 5, FN. 3. The Decision addressed three IPRs,
`
`namely IPR2013-00601, IPR2013-00602 and IPR2013-00636; Exhibit 1018 from
`
`IPR2013-00636 is Exhibit 1019 in the present case. Broadcom therefore submits
`
`the present Motion to Seal to confirm that Exhibit 1019 contains confidential
`
`information and to request permission to keep Exhibit 1019 under seal.
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Exhibit 1019 Contains Confidential Information
`
`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, but a party may
`
`file a concurrent motion to seal documents as provided by 37 C.F.R. § 42.14. Only
`
`“confidential information” is protected from public disclosure. 35 U.S.C. §
`
`316(a)(7); Office Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48760 (Aug. 14,
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756621v.1
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`2012). The Board will only grant a motion to seal for “good cause.” 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.54; IPR2012-00001, Paper No. 34 at 3.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1019 contains confidential statements regarding Broadcom and the
`
`defendants in Ericsson Inc. v. D-Link Corp. et al., Civil Action No. 6:10-cv-473
`
`(E.D. Tex.) (the “Texas Litigation”). Exhibit 1019 was filed under seal in the
`
`Texas Litigation, and therefore this information is not publicly known, and should
`
`remain confidential. Therefore, Broadcom respectfully requests permission to
`
`keep Exhibit 1019 under seal at the PTAB.
`
`
`
`
`
`II.
`
`Proposed Protective Order
`
`Broadcom proposes that the default protective order found in Appendix B of
`
`the Trial Practice Guide be entered.
`
`III. Certification of Conference with Opposing Party Pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.54.
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54, Broadcom certifies that it conferred with
`
`Ericsson regarding the scope of the proposed protective order, and the parties agree
`
`to use the default protective order in Appendix B of the Trial Practice Guide.
`
`
`
`
`
` IV. Conclusion
`
`Broadcom respectfully requests that the Board grant this Motion to Seal
`
`because it has good cause to seal confidential Exhibit 1019.
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756621v.1
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: January 27, 2014
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Dominic E. Massa/
`
`Dominic E. Massa, Reg. No. 44,905
`
`60 State St.
`
`Boston, MA 02109
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756621v.1
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that, on January 27, 2014, I caused a true and correct copy of
`
`the foregoing MOTION TO SEAL to be served via email on the attorneys
`
`identified in Ericsson’s Updated Mandatory Notice (Paper 8), whom consented to
`
`electronic service:
`
`Lead Counsel:
`Back-up Counsel:
`Email Address:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Peter J. Ayers
`J. Christopher Lynch
`EricssonIPR2013-602@leehayes.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Dominic E. Massa/
`Dominic E. Massa
`Registration No. 44,905
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756621v.1
`
`4
`
`