`
`Trials@uspto.gov Paper No. 34
`
`571-272-7822
`Entered: November 8, 2018
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`UNIFIED PATENTS, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Case IPR2018-00883
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before KEVIN W. CHERRY, GARTH D. BAER, and
`NABEEL U. KHAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`KHAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`DECISION
`Granting the Parties’ Joint Motion to Seal
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5; 42.54
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00883
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`
`
`On October 11, 2018, we entered a Decision to Institute in the above-
`captioned case. Because the Decision to Institute cites several papers and
`exhibits that Patent Owner and Petitioner filed under seal, we preliminarily
`entered the Decision to Institute as a non-public version. We also issued an
`Order (Paper 31) granting the parties’ motions to seal certain exhibits and
`portions of Patent Owner Supplemental Brief (Paper 22) and Petitioner’s
`Response Brief (Paper 25). As part of that Order we directed the parties to
`file a Joint Motion to Seal the Decision to Institute and to include a public
`version of the Decision to Institute with jointly proposed redactions in an
`exhibit to the Joint Motion to Seal. On October 18, 2018, the parties filed
`the Joint Motion to Seal and the proposed redactions to the Decision to
`Institute.
`“There is a strong public policy for making all information filed in a
`quasi-judicial administrative proceeding open to the public.” Garmin Int’l v.
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC, IPR2012–00001, slip op. at 1–2 (PTAB Mar. 14,
`2013) (Paper 34). The standard for granting a motion to seal is “good
`cause.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.54. That standard includes showing that the
`information addressed in the motion to seal is truly confidential, and that
`such confidentiality outweighs the strong public interest in having the record
`open to the public. See Garmin, slip op. at 2–3.
`We have reviewed the parties’ proposed redacted version of the
`Decision to Institute and the explanation in the Joint Motion to Seal. The
`parties argue that the redactions are limited to statements that reveal
`sensitive and confidential information and provide reasons for each
`redaction. Specifically, the redactions relate to information that is subject to
`confidentiality provisions of third-party agreements, sensitive financial and
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00883
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`
`
`commercial information, and confidential settlement or license information.
`Having reviewed the parties’ submission, we agree that good cause exists to
`seal this information as it relates to confidential and sensitive business
`information.
`
`
`ORDER
`
`It is:
`ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motions to Seal is granted;
`FURTHER ORDERED that the non-public version of the Decision to
`Institute shall be held under seal; and
`FURTHER ORDERED that a redacted version of the Decision to
`Institute is entered in this case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00883
`Patent 8,934,535 B2
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Lionel M. Lavenue
`C. Brandon Rash
`James D. Stein
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`lionel.lavenue@finnegan.com
`brandon.rash@finnegan.com
`james.stein@finnegan.com
`
`Ashraf A. Fawzy
`Jonathan Stroud
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.
`afawzy@unifiedpatents.com
`jonathan@unifiedpatents.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`William P. Rothwell
`Kayvan B. Noroozi
`Joel P.N. Stonedale
`NOROOZI P.C.
`william@noroozipc.com
`kayvan@noroozipc.com
`joel@noroozipc.com
`
`Neil A. Rubin
`Kent Shum
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`nrubin@raklaw.com
`kshum@raklaw.com
`
`
`
`
`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
