VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation
- Beth Freeman
- 5:17-cv-05671
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In VLSI Technology v. Intel, Judge Freeman granted VLSI’s motion to seal selected portions of a filing containing Intel’s confidential business information.
The ruling limits public access to selected portions of VLSI’s filing that contain Intel’s confidential business information; it does not resolve the underlying dispute between VLSI and Intel.
What happened
In VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, VLSI asked the court to consider sealing selected portions of its motion seeking relief from a magistrate judge’s pretrial order. Intel supported the request and submitted a declaration and exhibits.
The court said the filing concerned expert opinions about possible damages for alleged infringement, making it more than indirectly related to the case’s merits. Because of that connection, Intel had to show strong reasons for sealing the information. Intel said the material revealed confidential financial decisions, marketing research, customer preferences, potential price premiums, and product-sales strategies.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled that strong reasons supported sealing the highlighted portions and that the request was narrowly limited. The court therefore granted the administrative motion to consider whether another party’s material should be sealed; this order did not decide the underlying infringement or pretrial-relief issues.
The detailed version
- VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation · No. 5:17-cv-05671
- Beth Freeman
- Sept. 26, 2023
Background
VLSI filed a motion seeking relief from a nondispositive pretrial order issued by a magistrate judge. In connection with that filing, VLSI filed an administrative motion asking the court to consider whether another party’s material should be sealed. Intel later filed a declaration and exhibits supporting the sealing request.
The material at issue consisted of selected, green-highlighted portions of VLSI’s motion for relief. The court said that motion related to a motion to strike VLSI’s expert opinions concerning available damages for the alleged infringement.
Legal standard
Court records are generally presumed to be open to public inspection. When records relate more than indirectly to the underlying legal claims, the party seeking to keep them sealed must show compelling reasons that outweigh the public’s general right of access. Any sealing request must also be narrowly tailored.
Parties’ position
Intel argued that disclosure would reveal confidential information about its financial decisions, marketing research, and business strategies. The information included Intel’s analysis of which features customers value, potential price premiums for those features, and how certain features might affect sales of particular products. Intel also argued that disclosure could give competitors and potential business counterparties unfair insight into its strategies and cost-benefit analyses, and that no less restrictive alternative would prevent the potential competitive harm.
Ruling
The court found compelling reasons to seal the highlighted portions because they disclosed Intel’s confidential analysis of customer preferences, potential feature-related price premiums, and expected effects on product sales. It also found the request narrowly tailored. The court therefore granted the administrative motion to consider whether another party’s material should be sealed, as to the identified portions of ECF No. 652, VLSI’s motion for relief.
The order addressed sealing only. The opinion does not state a ruling on the underlying motion for relief, the motion concerning VLSI’s expert opinions, or the alleged infringement.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.