`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`BROADCOM CORPORATION
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET L.M. ERICSSON
`
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00636
`U.S. Patent No. 6,424,625
`
`
`
`MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756123v.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
`
`1018).
`
`
`
`The Board’s Decision Denying Ericsson’s Motion for Additional Discovery
`
`(Paper No. 20) (“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. Broadcom therefore submits the
`
`present Motion to Seal to confirm that Exhibit 1018 contains confidential
`
`information and to request permission to keep Exhibit 1018 under seal.
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Exhibit 1018 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,
`
`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.
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756123v.1
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1018 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 1018 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 1018 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 1018.
`
`
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756123v.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 121756123v.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
`EricssonIPR2013-636@leehayes.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Dominic E. Massa/
`Dominic E. Massa
`Registration No. 44,905
`
`
`ActiveUS 121756123v.1
`
`4
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
