IPR2014-01121
`
`Filed on behalf of Nidec Motor Corporation
`By:
`Scott R. Brown
`Matthew B. Walters
`HOVEY WILLIAMS LLP
`10801 Mastin Blvd., Suite 1000
`Overland Park, Kansas 66210
`Tel: (913) 647-9050
`Fax: (913) 647-9057
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`ZHONGSHAN BROAD OCEAN MOTOR CO., LTD.; BROAD OCEAN
`MOTOR, LLC; AND BROAD OCEAN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`NIDEC MOTOR CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-01121
`U.S. Patent No. 7,626,349
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before BENJAMIN D.M. WOOD, Administrative Patent Judge
`JAMES A. TARTAL, Administrative Patent Judge
`
`PATRICK M. BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judge
`
`PATENT OWNER'S MOTION TO SEAL
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Filed on behalf of Nidec Motor Corporation
`By:
`Scott R. Brown
`Matthew B. Walters
`HOVEY WILLIAMS LLP
`10801 Mastin Blvd., Suite 1000
`Overland Park, Kansas 66210
`Tel: (913) 647-9050
`Fax: (913) 647-9057
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`ZHONGSHAN BROAD OCEAN MOTOR CO., LTD.; BROAD OCEAN
`MOTOR, LLC; AND BROAD OCEAN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`NIDEC MOTOR CORPORATION
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-01121
`U.S. Patent No. 7,626,349
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before BENJAMIN D.M. WOOD, Administrative Patent Judge
`JAMES A. TARTAL, Administrative Patent Judge
`
`PATRICK M. BOUCHER, Administrative Patent Judge
`
`PATENT OWNER'S MOTION TO SEAL
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14 and 42.54, Patent Owner Nidec Motor
`
`Corporation (“Nidec”) hereby moves to seal Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude
`
`Evidence (Paper No. 45). As detailed below, this paper contains information the
`
`Petitioner deems highly confidential and extremely sensitive operations
`
`information.
`
`
`
`Counsel for Petitioners and Nidec have agreed on the terms of a modified
`
`protective order relating to the use of confidential information and Exhibits in this
`
`proceeding. Specifically, the Default Protective Order has been amended to
`
`accommodate a second “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” provision to protect highly
`
`confidential material contained in the relevant filing. Patent Owner has filed the
`
`Stipulated Protective Order along with a redline showing how the Stipulated
`
`Protective Order differs from the Board’s Default Protective Order (See Exhibits
`
`2001 and 2002, respectively). A redacted version of Paper No. 45 is being
`
`submitted contemporaneously herewith.
`
`I.
`
`Good Cause Exits for Sealing Confidential Information In This
`Proceeding.
`
`The Board must find “good cause” exists to enter a protective order and
`
`must “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.” Garmin v. Cuozzo, IPR2012-00001, Paper 36 (April 5, 2013). See
`
`also Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48760 (Aug. 14,
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`2012). The Board identifies “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.” 77 Fed. Reg. at 78760 (citing 37 C.F.R. § 42.54).
`
`Beyond the confidential designation available in the Default Protective
`
`Order, the “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” provision mirrors the provision of the
`
`protective order entered in related district court litigation and is necessary to
`
`protect highly confidential design, development, testing, and financial information,
`
`the disclosure of which would cause significant competitive harm. Petitioner relies
`
`on this detailed operations information in its business.
`
`This type of highly confidential information has been—and will continue to
`
`be—designated as Attorneys’ Eyes Only in the co-pending litigation and this type
`
`of operations-related information would typically never be provided to the public
`
`in any context. Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978).
`
`Accordingly, Nidec respectfully requests that the Board protect against the
`
`public disclosure of the following information:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Materials to be Sealed as “Confidential” or “Attorneys’ Eyes Only”
`
`Paper /
`
`Contents
`
`Good Cause
`
`Exhibit
`
`45
`
`Patent Owner’s
`
`Contains Confidential Operations
`
`Motion to Exclude
`
`Information—This portion contains non-
`
`Evidence (pg.2,
`
`public information illustrating the business
`
`sentence beginning
`
`relationship of Petitioner.
`
`“Mr. Hu describes
`
`the exhibits as…”
`
`45
`
`Patent Owner’s
`
`Contains Confidential Operations
`
`Motion to Exclude
`
`Information—This portion contains non-
`
`Evidence (pg.3,
`
`public information illustrating the business
`
`sentence beginning
`
`relationship of Petitioner.
`
`“He states only
`
`that Exhibits
`
`1034…”
`
`
`
`
`
`II. Certification of Non-Publication
`
`On behalf of Nidec, undersigned counsel certifies that the confidential
`
`4
`
`
`
`information identified in the foregoing paper and sought to be sealed has not, to
`
`their knowledge, been published or otherwise made public.
`
`III. Certification of Conference with Opposing Party
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54, the undersigned counsel has conferred in
`
`good faith with counsel for Petitioners. The parties have agreed to the scope and
`
`terms of the Stipulated Protective Order.
`
`IV. Proposed Protective Order
`
`The Protective Order filed previously as Exhibit 2001 is the Stipulated
`
`Protective Order to which the parties have agreed to be bound in this matter.
`
`Moreover, Exhibit 2002 is a redline showing how the Stipulated Protective Order
`
`differs from the Board’s Default Protective Order.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Scott R. Brown
`Scott R. Brown, Reg. No. 40,535
`Matthew B. Walters, Reg. No. 65,343
`HOVEY WILLIAMS LLP
`10801 Mastin Blvd., Suite 1000
`Overland Park, Kansas 66210
`Tel: (913) 647-9050
`Fax: (913) 647-9057
`sbrown@hoveywilliams.com
`mwalters@hoveywilliams.com
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR PATENT OWNER
`NIDEC MOTOR CORPORATION
`
`
`Dated: September 25, 2015
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 25th day of September, 2015, a
`
`true and accurate copy of the foregoing Patent Owner’s Motion to Seal was filed
`
`through the Patent Review Processing System and served on the following counsel
`
`for Petitioner via email:
`
`
`STEVEN F. MEYER
`CHARLES BAKER
`LOCKE LORD LLP
`Three World Financial Center
`New York, New York 10281-2101
`Tel: (212) 415-8535
`
`
`smeyer@lockelord.com
`cbaker@lockelord.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Scott R. Brown
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
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
