`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Unified Patents Inc.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Bradium Technologies LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`
`MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Introduction
`On August 31, 2018, Petitioner filed an Unopposed Motion for Protective Order
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`
`I.
`
`in the present proceeding. Pursuant to the proposed Protective Order, Petitioner has
`
`produced voluntary discovery to Patent Owner including (1) voluntary interrogatory
`
`responses, and (2) a deposition of Petitioner’s chief executive office, Kevin Jakel. In
`
`addition, Petitioner produced to Patent Owner a (for now) sealed version of the
`
`Board’s Institution Decision in Unified Patents, Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive Streaming,
`
`LLC, IPR2018-00883. That decision will likely be made mostly public after the Board
`
`rules on a pending motion to seal a redacted version. Petitioner here is filing its Reply
`
`to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real Parties in Interest,
`
`which cites to information and material disclosed in each of the documents referenced
`
`above.
`
`For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner asserts that the unredacted
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real
`
`Parties in Interest contains confidential information. Accordingly, Petitioner hereby
`
`moves to seal unredacted Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent
`
`Owner Response on Real Parties in Interest.
`
`II. Motion to Seal
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on
`
`Real Parties in Interest references and cites to certain material that Petitioner
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`produced according to voluntary discovery that contain confidential, sensitive
`
`commercial information, including closely held information related to Unified’s core
`
`business. Petitioner submits that the unredacted version of Petitioner’s Reply to
`
`Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real Parties in Interest
`
`should be sealed because it contains confidential information. The unredacted Reply
`
`to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real Parties in Interest
`
`was filed by Petitioner as Board’s and parties’ eyes only.
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14 and 42.55, Petitioner moves to seal the
`
`unredacted Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner
`
`Response on Real Parties in Interest.
`
`III. Good Cause Exists for Sealing Petitioner’s Reply to Patent
`Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real Parties in
`Interest
`In deciding whether to seal documents, the Board must find “good cause,”
`
`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
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`Unified’s status as the real party in interest, and relates to business confidential
`
`information. For this reason, the public interest in having access to the unredacted
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real
`
`Parties in Interest 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.
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner
`Response on Real Parties in Interest
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on
`
`Real Parties in Interest includes both confidential and non-confidential information.
`
`Specifically, Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner
`
`Response on Real Parties in Interest includes confidential information provided in
`
`the sample Member Agreement and Subscription Form (Exhibits 2008 and 2009),
`
`which contain agreed-upon confidentiality provisions, the Transcript of Deposition
`
`of Kevin Jakel (Exhibit 2004), and the Voluntary Interrogatory Responses of Kevin
`
`Jakel (Exhibit 2013). For the reasons given in the Unopposed Motion to Seal (Paper
`
`18) filed on September 24, 2018, good cause exists for sealing these exhibits.
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on
`
`Real Parties in Interest also cites a recent Board decision in Unified Patents, Inc. v.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`Realtime Adaptive Streaming, LLC, IPR2018-00883 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 11, 2018), Paper
`
`29 (Decision on Institution) that is currently under seal. Because that decision is
`
`currently under seal, Petitioner has redacted any material citing to and referencing
`
`this decision, in the interest of observing the currently sealed nature of the Board’s
`
`opinion there. A Motion to Seal has been filed in IPR2018-00883 requesting that
`
`the Board approve a Public Version of the Decision on Institution that selectively
`
`redacts the limited confidential information contained therein. See Joint Motion to
`
`Seal the Decision on Institution, Unified Patents, Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive
`
`Streaming, LLC, IPR2018-00883 (Oct. 18, 2018), Paper 32. Should the Board there
`
`grant that joint motion and make the majority of the opinion public, upon request of
`
`the Board, Petitioner is happy to provide revised redactions to Petitioner’s Reply to
`
`Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response here consistent with the Public Version of the
`
`Decision on Institution in IPR2018-00883.
`
`Accordingly, Petitioner respectfully requests that the confidential information
`
`included in Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner
`
`Response on Real Parties in Interest be redacted and that the unredacted version of
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Patent Owner Response on Real
`
`Parties in Interest be sealed for at least the reasons given in the Unopposed Motion
`
`to Seal (Paper 18) with respect to the Membership Agreement and Subscription
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`Form, the unredacted Transcript of Deposition of Kevin Jakel, the Voluntary
`
`Interrogatory Responses of Kevin Jakel, and the Decision on Institution in IPR2018-
`
`00883.
`
`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 the joint protective order.
`
`VI. Request for Conference Call with the Board
`Should the Board not be inclined to grant the present Motion to Seal, the
`
`parties hereby request a conference call with the Board to discuss any concerns prior
`
`to the Board issuing a decision on the Motion.
`
`Unified Patents Inc.
`
`By:/David L. Cavanaugh/
`
`
`David L. Cavanaugh
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`david.cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`
`Daniel V. Williams
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`daniel.williams@wilmerhale.com
`
`Jonathan E. Robe
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`jonathan.robe@wilmerhale.com
`
`Jonathan Stroud
`Unified Patents Inc.
`1875 Connecticut Ave., NW. Floor 10
`Washington, D.C., 20009
`jonathan@unifiedpatents.com
`
`Roshan S. Mansinghani
`Unified Patents Inc.
`13355 Noel Road, Suite 1100
`Dallas, TX 75240
`Tel: (214) 945-0200
`Email: roshan@unifiedpatents.com
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that on November 7, 2018, I caused a true and correct copy
`
`IPR2018-00952
`Patent 9,253,239
`
`
`of the foregoing Motion to Seal to be served via electronic mail to the attorneys of
`
`record at the following email addresses:
`
`Chris J. Coulson
`Email ccoulson@bdiplaw.com
`
`Michael N. Zachary
`Email mzachary@bdiplaw.com
`
`Lauren N. Robinson
`Email lrobinson@bdiplaw.com
`
`Michael E. Shanahan
`Email: mshanahan@generalpatent.com
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/ Jonathan E Robe /
`
`Jonathan E. Robe, Reg. No. 76,033
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
`HALE AND DORR LLP
`1875 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
`Washington, DC 20006
`Tel: (202) 663-6000
`Fax: (202) 663-6363
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
