EXHIBIT 3001
`
`Counsel:
`Orders granting Petitioner’s Motions to Seal Exhibit 1063 in each of IPR2021-01547, Paper 23
`and IPR2021-01548, Paper 22 will be issued in due course.
`The second filing of Exhibit 1063 in IPR2021-01548 will be expunged as a duplicate.
`The filing of Patent Owner’s Sur-replies (IPR2021-01547, Paper 27 and IPR2021-01548, Paper
`26) as “Parties and Board” only is acknowledged. As proposed by Petitioner, the parties will
`meet and confer within two weeks to decide what redactions if any are necessary to the Sur-
`replies before filing public versions of the Sur-replies.
`A second motion to seal is unnecessary if the confidential information in the Sur-replies pertains
`solely to Exhibit 1063.
`Regards,
`Esther Goldschlager
`Supervisory Paralegal Specialist
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`(571) 272-7822
`
`From: Arvind Jairam <ajairam@McKoolSmith.com>
`Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2022 3:52 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: Micron-Vervain_OHS <Micron-Vervain_OHS@orrick.com>; Lang, Jason
`<jlang@orrick.com>; Vervain-Mic-MS <Vervain-Mic-MS@McKoolSmith.com>
`Subject: IPR2021-01547 and -01548
`CAUTION: This email has originated from a source outside of USPTO. PLEASE CONSIDER THE SOURCE
`before responding, clicking on links, or opening attachments.
`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 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
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY: The information contained in and transmitted with this e-mail is SUBJECT TO THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT
`and ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGE and is CONFIDENTIAL. It is intended only for the individual or entity designated above. You
`are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, use or reliance upon the information contained in and transmitted with this e-mail
`by or to anyone other than the addressee designated above by the sender is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
`error, please notify the sender by reply immediately. Any e-mail erroneously transmitted to you should be immediately destroyed.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`