`
`
`
`
`
`Filed on behalf of: Askeladden LLC
`
`Paper No. ___
`Filed: June 5, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`Askeladden LLC
`Petitioner
`v.
`Sean McGhie and Brian Buchheit
`Patent Owner
`_____________
`
`Case IPR2015-00137
`U.S. Patent No. 8,297,502
`
`_____________
`
`PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SEAL
`PETITIONER’S OPPOSITION TO
`PATENT OWNERS’ MOTION FOR DISCOVERY AUTHORIZATION
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.54
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54, Petitioner Askeladden LLC (“Askeladden”)
`
`hereby moves to seal portions of Petitioner’s Opposition to Patent Owner’s Motion
`
`for Discovery Authorization (“the Opposition”), filed concurrently herewith. The
`
`Opposition discusses evidence that has already been sealed, as a result of
`
`Petitioner’s previous discussions with Patent Owners and Patent Owners’
`
`acquiescence to sealing such evidence. See Paper 16 at 1; Paper 19 at 1.
`
`Consequently, the Board’s Default Protective Order (“Protective Order”) was
`
`entered in this case. Paper 17; Paper 21; Paper 22. Thus, Petitioner seeks to seal the
`
`Opposition inasmuch as it contains information already deemed confidential and
`
`related information. Pursuant to Section 4(A)(ii) of the Protective Order, Petitioner
`
`is also filing partially redacted public versions of its Opposition.
`
`I.
`
`
`
`Good cause exists for sealing Petitioner’s 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). Under the Board’s
`
`rules, “confidential information [is identified] 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).
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owners seek discovery in connection with their speculation that
`
`“Alleged RPI,” i.e., “owning banks” of The Clearing House Payments Company
`
`LLC (“PayCo”) and the Clearing House Association, are real parties-in-interest in
`
`this proceeding. See Paper 36. The Opposition discusses evidence showing that
`
`Askeladden alone controls the prosecution, direction, and funding of this IPR. The
`
`narrowly-tailored excerpts of the Opposition that Askeladden seeks to seal discuss
`
`details of Askeladden’s organizational structure, business processes, financing, and
`
`operational guidelines, which are confidential.
`
`
`
`Askeladden has a strong interest in maintaining the confidentiality of its
`
`internal business structure and strategy. Further, there is no countervailing interest
`
`that would counsel against grant of the present motion. The confidential
`
`information relates to evidence already sealed in this case, which Patent Owners
`
`did not oppose. And, the sealed information has nothing to do with the underlying
`
`substantive matters and questions at issue in this IPR proceeding. Therefore, grant
`
`of the present motion will have no effect on the public’s interest in “maintaining a
`
`complete and understandable file history.”
`
`
`
`Moreover, the Opposition relates only to a non-dispositive request for
`
`discovery about third-parties such that sealing it will not inhibit public access to a
`
`complete and understandable file history.
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Additionally, the Board previously accepted Askeladden’s motions to seal
`
`papers and exhibits containing the same or substantively similar information. See
`
`Papers 14-16; Paper 19; Paper 33; Ex. 1031; Ex. 1033.
`
`II.
`
`Certification of Non-Publication
`
`
`
`On behalf of Petitioner, undersigned counsel certifies that the information
`
`identified as confidential 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 and Proposed Protective Order
`
`Petitioner previously conferred with Patent Owners regarding sealing
`
`
`
`documents and portions thereof containing the same, or substantively similar,
`
`confidential information that Petitioner requests to seal in the Opposition. Patent
`
`Owners did not oppose. The Board’s Default Protective Order has already been
`
`entered. Further, Petitioner notified Patent Owners of its intent to file the present
`
`motion, and Patent Owners did not object.
`
`IV. Conclusion
`
`
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board seal
`
`the Opposition, which Petitioner files concurrently herewith.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO
`1290 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, New York 10104-3800
`Facsimile: (212) 218-2200
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Frank A. DeLucia/
`Frank A. DeLucia, Jr.
`Attorney for Petitioner
`Registration No. 42,476
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e)(4) and 42.105, the undersigned certifies
`
`that on this date, a true and correct copy of this Petitioner’s Motion to Seal
`
`Petitioner’s Opposition to Patent Owners’ Motion for Discovery Authorization
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54 was served via email on the Patent Owner’s counsel
`
`at the following address indicated in the Patent Owner’s Mandatory Notices.
`
`
`
`bbuchheit@gmail.com
`
`
`
`Dated: June 5, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Frank A. DeLucia/
`Frank A. DeLucia, Jr.
`Attorney for Petitioner
`Registration No. 42,476
`
`
`
`