From:
`To:
`Cc:
`Subject:
`
`Arvind Jairam
`Trials
`Micron-Vervain_OHS; Lang, Jason; Vervain-Mic-MS
`IPR2021-01547 and -01548
`
`Your Honors,
`
`Patent Owner writes to seek guidance from the Board as to the procedure for handling the following
`situation regarding confidential information in IPR2021-01547 and IPR2021-01548.
`
`In each of these IPRs, Petitioner filed a Motion to Seal (Paper No. 23 in the -01547 proceeding;
`Paper No. 22 in the -01548 proceeding) requesting that Ex. 1063 be sealed. In each of its Motions to
`Seal, Petitioner stated that “[t]he entire Exhibit … contains highly detailed, sensitive, confidential,
`and non-public information concerning the design, development, functionality, and operation of a
`Micron eMMC product,” “Petitioner guards such information closely and has not made, and does
`not intend to make, this information publicly available,” and “the information sought to be sealed by
`this Motion has not been published or otherwise made publicly available.” (-01547 Motion to Seal at
`2; -01548 Motion to Seal at 2.) However, in its Replies (Paper No. 24 in the -01547 proceeding;
`Paper No. 23 in the -01548 proceeding), which Petitioner filed publicly, Petitioner included text from
`that exhibit. (See -01547 Reply at 9-10 (citing Ex. 1063 at 18-21); -01548 Reply at 9 (citing Ex. 1063
`at 18-21).) Patent Owner believes that Petitioner has waived confidentiality of Ex. 1063 by including
`text from that exhibit in its publicly-filed Replies.
`
`Patent Owner intends to discuss Ex. 1063 (including text thereof) in its Sur-Replies, which are due
`November 18. In light of the uncertainty regarding the status of Ex. 1063 as noted above, Patent
`Owner requests guidance from the Board as to whether the Sur-Replies (which will discuss Ex. 1063,
`including text therein) should be filed publicly or whether Patent Owner needs to file a motion to
`seal in these proceedings. If a motion to seal is needed, Patent Owner additionally requests
`guidance as to whether both (1) sealed and (2) redacted, public versions of the Sur-Replies should be
`filed. Patent Owner appreciates the Board’s guidance regarding this issue.
`
`Patent Owner has conferred with Petitioner about this issue prior to sending this email. Petitioner’s
`position is as follows:
`
`Petitioner-Micron disagrees that it waived confidentiality of Ex. 1063. As its motions to seal explain,
`Ex. 1063 includes confidential details on the inner workings of Micron’s eMMC products. E.g., Ex.
`1063, p. 3 (MCRNVE0029116), p. 5 (MCRNVE0029009 diagram). Petitioner replies include a small
`quote to Ex. 1063 only for the general notion that these products use dynamic wear leveling to
`direct the Board to the relevant aspects of Ex. 1063. Paper No. 24, -01547 proceeding, Reply at 9-
`10; Paper No. 23, -01548 proceeding, Reply at 9. The replies in no way make Ex. 1063 public and
`amount to any waiver. Petitioner understands that Patent Owner intends to discuss the details of
`Ex. 1063 in its sur-replies. Petitioner understands that Patent Owner is unsure whether it can file its
`sur-replies publicly in view of this, and Petitioner does not know what details Patent Owner intends
`to discuss. In view of this, Petitioner proposes that Patent Owner files its sur-replies under seal (or
`at least the portions discussing Ex. 1063), and within two weeks of filing, Petitioner will work with
`Patent Owner to determine what redactions, if any, are necessary to the sur-replies. Petitioner will
`
`Vervain Ex. 2021 p.1
`Micron v. Vervain
`IPR2021-01547
`
`

`

`then file public versions with any necessary redactions at this time, along with a motion to seal (since
`it is Micron’s confidential information, Petitioner-Micron believes that it is the proper party to
`submit any supporting rational in a motion to seal).
`
`
`Respectfully,
`Arvind Jairam
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Vervain Ex. 2021 p.2
`Micron v. Vervain
`IPR2021-01547
`
`