`_________________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________________
`
`
`UNIFIED PATENTS INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`BRADIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC
`Patent Owner
`_________________________
`
`IPR2018-00952
`U.S. Patent 9,253,239
`_________________________
`
`
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SEAL BRADIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC’s
`PATENT OWNER RESPONSE AND PATENT OWNER SUR-REPLY
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`On August 31, 2018, Petitioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Protective
`
`Order in the present proceeding. See Paper 13; see also Ex. 1025 (Modified
`
`Protective Order). Pursuant to the proposed modified Protective Order, Petitioner
`
`has produced voluntary discovery to Patent Owner including (1) a sample
`
`membership agreement, (2) voluntary interrogatory responses, and (3) a deposition
`
`of Petitioner’s chief executive office, Kevin Jakel. In addition, Petitioner produced
`
`to Patent Owner a sealed version of the Board’s Institution Decision in Unified
`
`Patents, Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive Streaming, LLC, IPR2018-00883.1
`
`Bradium Technologies LLC’s Patent Owner Response Pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`
`§42.120 was filed on April 1, 2019 (“POR”) which cites to information and material
`
`disclosed in each of the documents referenced above. See generally Paper 38. Patent
`
`Owner also filed a public version of its POR with the confidential information
`
`contained therein redacted. See generally Paper 37.
`
`Bradium Technologies LLC’s Patent Owner Sur-Reply was filed on July 29,
`
`2019 (“Sur-Reply”) which cites to information and material disclosed in each of the
`
`
`1 A redacted public version of the Institution Decision was subsequently made
`
`available in that proceeding on November 27, 2018. See Unified Patents, Inc. v.
`
`Realtime Adaptive Streaming, LLC, IPR2018-00883, Paper 29 (Oct. 11, 2018).
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`documents referenced above. See generally Paper 45. Patent Owner also filed a
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`U.S. 9,253,239
`
`public version of its Sur-Reply with the confidential information contained therein
`
`redacted. See generally Paper 46.
`
`For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner asserts that the unredacted POR and
`
`Sur-Reply contain confidential information. Accordingly, Petitioner hereby moves
`
`to seal the unredacted POR and Sur-Reply and to redact the confidential information
`
`from the public version of the POR and Sur-Reply. Patent Owner takes no position
`
`regarding the confidentiality of the materials asserted by Unified to be confidential,
`
`but does not oppose the motion.
`
`II. Requested Relief
`The POR and Sur-Reply reference and cite to certain material that Petitioner
`
`produced according to voluntary discovery. That material contains confidential,
`
`sensitive commercial information, including closely held information related to
`
`Unified’s core business. Petitioner submits that the unredacted version of the POR
`
`and Sur-Reply should be sealed because they contain confidential information.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14 and 42.55, Petitioner moves to seal the
`
`unredacted POR and Sur-Reply and to redact the confidential information from
`
`Paper 37, the public version of the POR, and from Paper 46, the public version of
`
`the Sur-Reply.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`III. Good Cause Exists
`In deciding whether to seal documents, the Board must find “good cause”
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`U.S. 9,253,239
`
`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). Here,
`
`the balance overwhelmingly favors protecting Unified’s highly confidential
`
`information by sealing these limited redactions. The information Unified seeks to
`
`protect has nothing to do with patentability, but rather involves Unified’s status as
`
`the sole real party-in-interest and relates to its confidential business information.
`
`For this reason, the public interest in having access to the unredacted POR and Sur-
`
`Reply is minimal, while the public interest is well-served in keeping such business
`
`information readily available and exchangeable between parties based on voluntary
`
`discovery, without the fear of incidental public exposure of confidential business
`
`information.
`
`A. Patent Owner Response
`The POR includes both confidential and nonconfidential information.
`
`Specifically, the POR includes confidential information provided in the sample
`
`Member Agreement (Exhibit 2008), the Transcript of Deposition of Kevin Jakel
`
`(Exhibit 2004), and the Voluntary Interrogatory Responses of Kevin Jakel (Exhibit
`
`2013).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`This confidential and sensitive commercial information includes closely held
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`U.S. 9,253,239
`
`information related to Unified’s core business, membership terms, business
`
`strategy, and business financial information and constitutes highly confidential
`
`business information, as well as trade secrets. Disclosure of Unified’s highly
`
`confidential business information would provide Unified’s competitors and would-
`
`be business rivals with a roadmap for replicating Unified’s unique, valuable
`
`business model and would reveal contractual business information between two
`
`parties produced voluntarily under a protective order. Accordingly, the public
`
`interest would be served by maintaining the confidentiality of this information. For
`
`the reasons set forth above, good cause exists for sealing the confidential
`
`information reflected in the POR. Petitioner hereby requests that the unredacted
`
`version of the POR be sealed in its entirety and the confidential information be
`
`redacted in the public version of the POR.
`
`B. Patent Owner’s Sur-Reply to Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner
`Response
`The Sur-Reply includes both confidential and nonconfidential information.
`
`Specifically, the Sur-Reply includes confidential information provided in the
`
`Transcript of Deposition of Kevin Jakel (Exhibit 2004).
`
`This confidential and sensitive commercial information includes closely held
`
`information related to Unified’s core business, membership terms, business
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`strategy, and business financial information and constitutes highly confidential
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`U.S. 9,253,239
`
`business information, as well as trade secrets. Disclosure of Unified’s highly
`
`confidential business information would provide Unified’s competitors and would-
`
`be business rivals with a roadmap for replicating Unified’s unique, valuable
`
`business model and would reveal contractual business information between two
`
`parties produced voluntarily under a protective order. Accordingly, the public
`
`interest would be served by maintaining the confidentiality of this information. For
`
`the reasons set forth above, good cause exists for sealing the confidential
`
`information reflected in the Sur-Reply. Petitioner hereby requests that the
`
`unredacted version of the Sur-Reply be sealed in its entirety and the confidential
`
`information be redacted in the public version of the Sur-Reply.
`
`IV. Certification of Non-Publication
`The undersigned counsel for Petitioner certifies the information sought to be
`
`sealed by this Motion to Seal has not been published or otherwise made public.
`
`V.
`
`Protective Order
`Petitioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Protective Order on August 31,
`
`2018. The information subject to the instant unopposed Motion to Seal was all
`
`voluntarily produced under that protective order signed by both parties.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`VI. Request for Conference Call with the Board
`Should the Board not be inclined to grant the present Motion to Seal,
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`U.S. 9,253,239
`
`Petitioner hereby request a conference call with the Board to discuss any concerns
`
`prior to the Board issuing a decision on the Motion.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
` /Roshan Suresh Masinghani/
`Roshan Suresh Mansinghani
`Reg. No. 62,429
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: September 11, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on September 11, 2019 a copy of the foregoing
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION TO SEAL was served via electronic mail, as agreed to by
`
`counsel, upon the following counsel for Patent Owner:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Chris J. Coulson
`Bunsow De Mory LLP
`101 Brambach Rd.
`Scarsdale, NY 10583
`Email: ccoulson@bdiplaw.com
`
`Michael N. Zachary
`Bunsow De Mory LLP
`701 El Camino Real
`Redwood City, CA 94063
`Email: mzachary@bdiplaw.com
`
`Michael E. Shanahan
`Email: mshanahan@generalpatent.com
`
`
`
`
`/Roshan Suresh Mansinghani/
`Roshan Suresh Mansinghani
`Reg. No. 62,429
`
`
`
`i
`
`