Case 1:23-cv-00089-TSK-JPM Document 207-1 Filed 07/26/24 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:
`25894
`
`
`IN RE: AFLIBERCEPT PATENT LITIGATION
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
`
`
`
`
`MDL No.: 1:24-md-3103-TSK
`
`
`
`
`THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO
`CASE NO. 1:23-cv-00089-TSK
`
`
`
`MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
`MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL
`
`
`
`Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) seeks to file its Preliminary Injunction
`
`Bond (“Bond”). Because the Bond reflects projected sales data that Defendant considers
`
`confidential, Regeneron seeks permission to file the Bond under seal. In support of this request,
`
`and in compliance with the requirements of Local Rule of Civil Procedure 26.05(b)(2),
`
`Regeneron states as follows.
`
`Sealing the Bond is necessary.
`
`A.
`
`Patent infringement litigation, by its nature, involves trade secrets and other confidential
`
`information. The Bond contains commercially sensitive business information that Defendant
`
`considers confidential. Sealing this information is necessary because broadcasting a party’s
`
`commercially sensitive business information to the public creates an obvious risk of harm to that
`
`party’s competitive standing.
`
`B.
`
`The seal should remain in place indefinitely.
`
`Because the basis for sealing is that the Bond contains information that Defendant
`
`considers confidential, and that Defendant believes could harm its business if made public, the
`
`seal should remain in place indefinitely or until the parties agree otherwise.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00089-TSK-JPM Document 207-1 Filed 07/26/24 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:
`25895
`
`Sealing the Bond is proper.
`
`C.
`
`There are two sources of the public’s right of access to court documents: the First
`
`Amendment and the common law. Virginia Dep’t of State Police v. Washington Post, 386 F.3d
`
`567, 575 (4th Cir. 2004). The common law “does not afford as much substantive protection to
`
`the interests of the press and the public as does the First Amendment.” Id. Although the
`
`common law presumes access to all “judicial records and documents,” a party can rebut the
`
`presumption by showing some significant interest that outweighs the presumption. Id. Unlike
`
`the common law, the First Amendment right of access extends only to particular documents. Id.
`
`Although the First Amendment right of access most often applies in criminal proceedings, the
`
`Fourth Circuit has held that it also applies to documents filed in connection with a summary
`
`judgment motion or at trial in a civil case. Rushford v. New Yorker Mag., Inc., 846 F.2d 249,
`
`253 (4th Cir. 1988). Where the First Amendment applies, the denial of access must be
`
`necessitated by a compelling government interest and narrowly tailored to serve that interest. Id.
`
`But courts may substitute “higher value” for “government interest” in cases involving records
`
`filed by nongovernmental civil litigants, and trade secrets may constitute higher values that can
`
`overcome the First Amendment right of access. Hosaflook v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 2020
`
`WL 13179423, at *1 (N.D.W. Va. Jan. 9, 2020); Morris v. Cumberland Cnty. Hosp. Sys., Inc.,
`
`No. 5:12-CV-629-F, 2013 WL 6116861, at *2 (E.D.N.C. Nov. 13, 2013).
`
`Even where the First Amendment right of access applies, courts in the Fourth Circuit
`
`have held that it is proper to seal a private company’s confidential and proprietary business
`
`information because the information is not generally available to the public, does not bear on
`
`public matters, and could harm the company if published. See Accreditation Comm’n for Health
`
`Care, Inc. v. NextLOGiK, Inc., No. 5:20-CV-46-M, 2020 WL 2543787, at *2 (E.D.N.C. May 19,
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00089-TSK-JPM Document 207-1 Filed 07/26/24 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:
`25896
`
`2020); Jones v. Lowe’s Companies, Inc., 402 F. Supp. 3d 266, 291 (W.D.N.C. 2019), aff'd, 845
`
`F. App'x 205 (4th Cir. 2021); Silicon Knights, Inc. v. Epic Games, Inc., No. 5:07-CV-275-D,
`
`2011 WL 901958, at *1–2 (E.D.N.C. Mar. 15, 2011). Here, the Bond contains nonpublic
`
`information that Defendant considers confidential and proprietary and believes could harm its
`
`business if made public. Accordingly, the Court may properly seal the Bond.
`
`
`
`Based on the foregoing, Regeneron respectfully requests leave to file the Bond under
`
`***
`
`
`
` CAREY DOUGLAS KESSLER & RUBY, PLLC
`
`/s/ Steven R. Ruby
`Steven R. Ruby (WVSB No. 10752)
`David R. Pogue (WVSB No. 10806)
`Raymond S. Franks II (WVSB No. 6523)
`707 Virginia Street East
`901 Chase Tower (25301)
`P.O. Box 913
`Charleston, West Virginia 25323
`(304) 345-1234
`sruby@cdkrlaw.com
`drpogue@cdkrlaw.com
`rfranks@cdkrlaw.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Regeneron
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
`
`
`seal.
`
`Date: July 26, 2024
`
`Of Counsel:
`
`David I. Berl (admitted PHV)
`Ellen E. Oberwetter (admitted PHV)
`Thomas S. Fletcher (admitted PHV)
`Andrew V. Trask (admitted PHV)
`Teagan J. Gregory (admitted PHV)
`Shaun P. Mahaffy (admitted PHV)
`Kathryn S. Kayali (admitted PHV)
`Arthur J. Argall III (admitted PHV)
`Adam Pan (admitted PHV)
`Haylee N. Bernal Anderson (admitted PHV)
`Renee M. Griffin (admitted PHV)
`Jennalee Beazley* (admitted PHV)
`Rhochelle Krawetz
`WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
`680 Maine Avenue, SW
`Washington, DC 20024
`(202) 434-5000
`dberl@wc.com
`eoberwetter@wc.com
`tfletcher@wc.com
`atrask@wc.com
`tgregory@wc.com
`smahaffy@wc.com
`sdouglass@wc.com
`kkayali@wc.com
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00089-TSK-JPM Document 207-1 Filed 07/26/24 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:
`25897
`
`aargall@wc.com
`apan@wc.com
`njordan@wc.com
`handerson@wc.com
`rgriffin@wc.com
`jbeazley@wc.com
`rkrawetz@wc.com
`
`*Admitted only in Pennsylvania; practice
`supervised by D.C. Bar members
`
`Elizabeth Stotland Weiswasser (admitted PHV)
`Anish R. Desai (admitted PHV)
`Natalie C. Kennedy (admitted PHV)
`Jennifer Brooks Crozier (admitted PHV)
`Tom Yu (admitted PHV)
`Yi Zhang (admitted PHV)
`Kathryn Leicht (admitted PHV)
`Rocco Recce (admitted PHV)
`Zhen Lin (admitted PHV)
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES
`767 Fifth Avenue
`New York, NY 10153
`Elizabeth.Weiswasser@weil.com
`Anish.Desai@weil.com
`Natalie.Kennedy@weil.com
`Jennifer.Crozier@weil.com
`Tom.Yu@weil.com
`Yi.Zhang@weil.com
`Kathryn.Leicht@weil.com
`Rocco.Recce@weil.com
`Zhen.Lin@weil.com
`
`Christopher M. Pepe (admitted PHV)
`Priyata P. Patel (admitted PHV)
`Matthew Sieger (admitted PHV)
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES
`2001 M Street, NW
`Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20036
`Christopher.Pepe@weil.com
`Priyata.Patel@weil.com
`Matthew.Seiger@weil.com
`
`Andrew E. Goldsmith (admitted PHV)
`Jacob E. Hartman (admitted PHV)
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00089-TSK-JPM Document 207-1 Filed 07/26/24 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:
`25898
`
`Mary Charlotte Y. Carroll (admitted PHV)
`Sven E. Henningson (admitted PHV)
`Alyssa J. Picard (admitted PHV)
`KELLOGG, HANSEN, TODD, FIGEL &
`FREDERICK, P.L.L.C.
`1615 M Street, N.W., Suite 400
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`TEL: (202) 326-7900
`agoldsmith@kellogghansen.com
`jhartman@kellogghansen.com
`mcarroll@kellogghansen.com
`shenningson@kellogghansen.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Regeneron
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:23-cv-00089-TSK-JPM Document 207-1 Filed 07/26/24 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:
`25899
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that on the 26th day of July 2024, service of the
`
`foregoing was made by electronic mail to counsel of record for Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Steven R. Ruby
`Steven R. Ruby (WVSB No. 10752)
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`