Finjan, LLC. v. Cisco Systems Inc.
- Beth Freeman
- 5:17-cv-00072
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Finjan v. Cisco, Judge Van Keulen granted four motions to seal confidential technical information and source code.
Finjan, Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. were affected by the sealing order. The order also limited public access to specified court filings and exhibits containing information the court found confidential and potentially harmful to Cisco if disclosed.
What happened
Finjan, Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc. concerned four requests to keep certain court filings and exhibits from public view. The materials were submitted in connection with motions involving reconsideration of an order about Cisco’s effort to strike parts of Finjan’s amended expert reports.
The court applied the lower “good cause” standard because the materials related to discovery rather than the merits of the case. It found that the materials contained confidential technical information and source code related to Cisco’s accused products, and that disclosure could harm Cisco. The requested redactions were described as narrowly tailored.
Judge Susan Van Keulen granted all four motions to seal, covering specified portions of some filings and entire exhibits in others. The order was entered on June 11, 2020.
The detailed version
- Finjan, LLC. v. Cisco Systems Inc. · No. 5:17-cv-00072
- Beth Freeman
- June 11, 2020
Background
Finjan, Inc. filed three administrative motions to file documents under seal, and Cisco Systems Inc. filed one. The documents were submitted in connection with Finjan’s motion for permission to seek reconsideration and Finjan’s motion for reconsideration of orders concerning Cisco’s motion to strike portions of Finjan’s amended expert reports.
Legal standard
The court explained that judicial records generally carry a strong presumption of public access. For records related more than tangentially to the merits of a case, a party must show compelling reasons for sealing them. For records not related, or only tangentially related, to the merits, the lower “good cause” standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) applies. Parties must also follow Civil Local Rule 79-5.
Court’s analysis
The court held that the good-cause standard applied because the materials were submitted in connection with a discovery-related motion rather than a motion concerning the merits of the case. After considering the motions, supporting declarations, pleadings, and related declarations, the court found good cause to seal the specified materials.
The court found that the materials contained confidential technical information and source code related to Cisco’s accused products. It stated that public disclosure could harm Cisco and that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored.
Disposition
The court granted all four administrative motions to file documents under seal. For Finjan’s motions at Docket Nos. 618, 626, and 653, the order sealed specified highlighted portions and, for listed exhibits, the entire documents. For Cisco’s motion at Docket No. 637, the order sealed specified portions of its brief and the entire listed exhibit. The order did not decide the underlying motions for reconsideration or the patent dispute.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.