`
`______________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________________________________________
`
`
`
`I.M.L. SLU
`Petitioner
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`WAG ACQUISITION, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,122,141
`
`_______________________________________
`
`Inter Partes Review Case No. IPR2016-01656
`_______________________________________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF THE
`MODIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER AND TO
`SEAL MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14 and 42.54, Patent Owner, WAG Acquisition, LLC
`
`“WAG”) hereby moves for entry of the Modified Protective Order in the form annexed to
`
`Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for Protective Order and to seal Patent Owner’s Motion for
`
`Additional Discovery and Exhibits 2005, 2006 and 2008 attached thereto (the “Discovery
`
`Motion”), which contain Petitioner’s confidential business information.
`
`I.
`
`GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR SEALING CERTAIN CONFIDENTIAL
`
`INFORMATION
`
`The Board’s standards for granting motions to seal are discussed in Garmin International
`
`v. Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC, IPR2012-00001 (Paper 34 at 4- 5) (Mar. 14, 2013). The
`
`standard for granting a motion to seal is “good cause.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.54(a). The moving party
`
`bears the burden of showing that the relief requested should be granted. 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(c).
`
`The Discovery Motion contains confidential information requiring that it be
`
`designated as “PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL” under the Modified Protective
`
`Order as it contains information Petitioner has characterized as highly confidential and that, in
`
`particular, discusses and reveals confidential information regarding “business-sensitive details of
`
`the Petitioner’s organizational structure, business processes, financing, and corporate and legal
`
`operations,” as described in Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion For Entry Of Protective Order.
`
`I.M.L. SLU v. WAG Acquisition, LLC, IPR2016-01656 (Paper 14 at 1) (May 5, 2017). This
`
`information is protectable under the Office Trial and Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48760 (Aug.
`
`14, 2012) (stating that the rules identify confidential matter 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.”) and should be sealed from the
`
`public.
`
`
`
`The sealing of the foregoing is of particular importance because Petitioner claims that it
`
`is “a non-public, foreign company, [and] has a strong interest in maintaining the confidentiality
`
`of this information [and that it] will be prejudiced unduly if it were compelled to produce its
`
`private, internal documents without protection in order to pursue this petition.” I.M.L. SLU v.
`
`WAG Acquisition, LLC, IPR2016-01656 (Paper 14 at 1) (May 5, 2017). Patent Owner respects
`
`Petitioner’s position on this matter.
`
`Conversely, there is no countervailing interest that would counsel against granting the
`
`present motion. Further, granting this motion would not prejudice or impact this underlying
`
`proceeding. The public’s interest in accessing the information in the Discovery Motion is
`
`outweighed by the prejudicial effect and competitive harm of disclosing the above described
`
`confidential business information.
`
`
`
`II.
`
`CERTIFICATION OF NON-PUBLICATION
`
`To the best of Patent Owner’s knowledge, and based on statements by Petitioner about its
`
`own information, the confidential information contained in the Discovery Motion has not been
`
`made publicly available.
`
`
`
`III. CERTIFICATION OF CONFERENCE WITH OPPOSING PARTY AND
`
`PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.54
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54, counsel for Patent Owner had conferred in good faith with
`
`counsel for Petitioner, and the parties previously agreed to entry of the modified version of the
`
`Board’s Modified Protective Order in the form annexed to Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion for
`
`
`
`Protective Order. The Discovery Motion is submitted subject to the Modified Protective Order
`
`and Patent Owner moves to file under seal.
`
`
`
`IV. CONCLUSION AND RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`Accordingly, good cause exists to warrant entry of the Modified Protective Order and to
`
`seal the Discovery Motion from public disclosure.
`
`
`
`Dated: June 12, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Ronald Abramson/
`Ronald Abramson
`(Attorney for Patent Owner)
`Reg. No. 34,762
`212-822-0163
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.6(e), the undersigned certifies that on June 12, 2017, a complete
`
`and entire copy of this Patent Owner’s Motion For Entry Of The Modified Protective Order And
`
`To Seal Motion for Additional Discovery was provided to the Petitioner by filing through the
`
`PTAB E2E System and via email to David.Yohannan@quarles.com,
`
`DCpatentdocket@kelleydrye.com, bjacob@kelleydrye.com, and syovits@kelleydrye.com.
`
`
`
` Dated: June 12, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`/Ronald Abramson/
`Ronald Abramson
`(Attorney for Patent Owner)
`Reg. No. 34,762
`
`
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
