`571.272.7822
`
` Paper 64
`
` Date: January 19, 2024
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`MASIMO CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`
`IPR2022-01299
`Patent US 7,761,127 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`Before JOSIAH C. COCKS, GEORGE R. HOSKINS, and
`ROBERT A. POLLOCK, Administrative Patent Judges.
`POLLOCK, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Granting Patent Owner’s Motion to Seal
`Granting Petitioner’s Unopposed Motion to Seal
`
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5, 42.14, 42.54
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299
`Patent US 7,761,127 B2
`
`
`Patent Owner filed a Motion to Seal documents it classifies as
`Confidential Business Information (“CBI”): Exhibits 2102–2104, 2106,
`2107, 2109–2121, 2127, 2128, 2131–2134, 2151, 2157, 2158, 2181,
`and 2182. Paper 36, 1; see also Exhibit 2094 (“Protective Order”).
`Petitioner filed an Unopposed Motion to Seal various documents it
`also classifies as CBI: the confidential version of Paper 46 (public version
`in Paper 45), Exhibit 1056, and portions of Exhibit 1055 (public version also
`filed). Paper 44, 1.
`The documents sought to be protected under seal were filed since our
`last Order Granting Patent Owner’s Renewed Motions, in Paper 30.
`As set forth in the Motions, the material sought to be sealed largely
`relates to Patent Owner’s contentions of objective evidence of non-
`obviousness, including its arguments of nexus between its commercial
`products and the challenged claims, and supporting evidence, including
`Declarations and deposition testimony. Paper 36 at 2–7; Paper 44 at 1–4.
`We find that good cause exists to seal each of the exhibits requested
`by Patent Owner. Patent Owner’s motion to seal is unopposed, and Patent
`Owner has provided public, redacted versions of each declaration it seeks to
`protect with limited redactions, and, thus, has balanced the strong public
`policy interest in making information available to the public with its own
`interests in maintaining certain information as business confidential.
`Accordingly, we grant Patent Owner’s motions to seal Exhibits 2102–2104,
`2106, 2107, 2109–2121, 2127, 2128, 2131–2134, 2151, 2157, 2158, 2181,
`and 2182.
`Petitioner’s motion is unopposed, and Petitioner has provided public,
`redacted versions of Paper 46 and Exhibit 1055 it seeks to protect with
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299
`Patent US 7,761,127 B2
`
`limited redactions, and, thus, has balanced the strong public policy interest
`in making information available to the public with its own interests in
`maintaining certain information as business confidential.1 Accordingly, we
`grant Petitioner’s Motion to seal Exhibit 1056, the confidential versions of
`the Reply in Paper 46, and the confidential version of Exhibit 1055.
`SO ORDERED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 There is an apparently inadvertent reference to a redacted version of
`Ex. 1056 “being filed” (Paper 44, 1), but no such reference was filed.
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-01299
`Patent US 7,761,127 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Walter Renner
`Nicholas Stephens
`Andrew Patrick
`Patrick King
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`nstephens@fr.com
`patrick@fr.com
`pking@fr.com
`IPR50095-0046IP1@fr.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Irfan A. Lateef
`Ted M. Cannon
`Jarom D. Kesler
`Jacob Peterson
`KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON, & BEAR, LLP
`2ial@knobbe.com
`2tmc@knobbe.com
`2jzk@knobbe.com
`2jup@knobbe.com
`AppleIPR127-1@knobbe.com
`
`
`
`