`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`––––––––––––––––––
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`––––––––––––––––––
`
`THE MANGROVE PARTNERS MASTER FUND, LTD., and APPLE INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`VIRNETX INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`––––––––––––––––––
`
`Case No. IPR2015-01046
`U.S. Patent No. 6,502,1351
`
`––––––––––––––––––
`
`PETITIONERS’ MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`1 Apple Inc., who filed a petition in IPR2016-00062, has been joined as a Petitioner
`in the instant proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01046
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`
`
`Petitioners’ Motion to Seal
`
`Petitioners The Mangrove Partners Master Fund, Ltd., and Apple Inc.
`
`(“Petitioners”) hereby move to seal the un-redacted version of Petitioners’
`
`Consolidated Reply Brief (Paper 50), in accordance with the default protective
`
`order filed by Petitioner Mangrove Partners Master Fund, Ltd. (“Petitioner
`
`Mangrove”) on March 3, 2016 (Paper No. 43). See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14, 42.54.
`
`Good cause exists for granting the instant motion to seal because information in
`
`Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply Brief has been designated as confidential during
`
`discovery by Petitioner Mangrove.
`
`II. Good Cause Exists for Sealing Certain Information Designated as
`Confidential
`
`The standard governing the Board’s determination of whether to grant a
`
`motion to seal is “good cause.” Garmin v. Cuozzo, IPR2012-00001, Paper 36
`
`(Apr. 5, 2013). The Board 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.” Id.
`
`Exhibit 2049 includes information that Petitioner Mangrove has asserted as
`
`confidential during discovery. This exhibit is subject to Patent Owner’s pending
`
`motion to seal (Paper 43), and constitutes confidential commercial information
`
`under the Board’s rules. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.54; Office Patent Trial Practice Guide,
`
`77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,760 (Aug. 14, 2012). Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01046
`
`
`
`Petitioners’ Motion to Seal
`
`Brief quotes and discusses the contents of this exhibit at several points, and those
`
`portions have been redacted in the public version of the Reply Brief (Paper 51).
`
`These redactions are appropriate under the same rationale described above. For the
`
`foregoing reasons, there is good cause for granting this motion to seal and protect
`
`this confidential information from disclosure.
`
`III. Proposed Protective Order
`
`Petitioner Mangrove filed a Motion for Entry of the Default Protective Order
`
`on March 3, 2016. (Paper 39). Pursuant to Section 4(B) of the protective order,
`
`the un-redacted version of Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply Brief has been clearly
`
`marked as “PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL.”
`
`IV. Conclusion
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Petitioners respectfully request that the Board seal
`
`the un-redacted version of Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply Brief.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Abraham Kasdan/
`Abraham Kasdan
`Reg. No. 32, 997
`WIGGIN & DANA LLP
`
`James T. Bailey
`Reg. No. 44,518
`THE LAW OFFICE OF JAMES. T. BAILEY
`Attorneys for Petitioner Mangrove
`
`2
`
`
`
`Dated: May 9, 2016
`
`/Jeffrey P. Kushan /
`Jeffrey P. Kushan
`Reg. No. 43,401
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`Attorney for Petitioner Apple
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01046
`
`
`
`Petitioners’ Motion to Seal
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), I hereby certify that on this 9th day of May,
`
`2016, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing and any
`
`accompanying exhibits by e-mail on the following counsel:
`
`Joseph E. Palys
`josephpalys@paulhastings.com
`
`Naveen Modi
`naveenmodi@paulhastings.com
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Abraham Kasdan/
`Abraham Kasdan
`Reg. No. 32, 997
`WIGGIN & DANA LLP
`
`James T. Bailey
`Reg. No. 44,518
`THE LAW OFFICE OF JAMES. T. BAILEY
`Attorneys for Petitioner Mangrove
`
`
`
`Dated: May 9, 2016
`
`/Jeffrey P. Kushan /
`Jeffrey P. Kushan
`Reg. No. 43,401
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`Attorney for Petitioner Apple
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
