VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation
- Beth Freeman
- 5:17-cv-05671
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation: Judge Freeman granted the parties’ motion to seal confidential Intel technical information in a summary-judgment order.
VLSI Technology LLC and Intel Corporation; the ruling also limits public access to specified portions of the summary-judgment order containing Intel’s confidential technical and manufacturing information.
What happened
VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation concerned a joint request to seal portions of the court’s summary-judgment order about patent infringement and invalidity.
The parties argued that disclosure could harm Intel competitively by revealing nonpublic technical information about its products, development, and manufacturing. The court found that the information was highly confidential and that the request was narrowly limited.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman ruled that compelling reasons justified sealing the specified portions and granted the administrative motion to seal.
The detailed version
- VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation · No. 5:17-cv-05671
- Beth Freeman
- Dec. 14, 2023
Background
VLSI Technology LLC and Intel Corporation jointly asked the court to seal portions of a summary-judgment order, identified as docket entry 772. The order addressed patent infringement and invalidity.
Legal standard
The court explained that judicial records generally carry a strong presumption of public access. Because the material concerned issues more than tangentially related to the merits of the case, the parties had to show “compelling reasons” for sealing it. The court also required the request to be narrowly tailored.
Court’s analysis
The parties argued that disclosure of the information could put Intel at a competitive disadvantage in future product development and business dealings. They identified the material as nonpublic, highly confidential technical information concerning the design, operation, and development of certain Intel prior-art products, the manufacturing processes for those products, the accused products and features, and changes between earlier and current manufacturing methods. The parties supported their request with details in a declaration from Mark Selwyn.
The court found compelling reasons to seal the highlighted portions and concluded that the request was narrowly tailored. The sealed material consisted of specified green-highlighted portions on pages 13, 15, 33, 42, 44, 45, and 46 of the summary-judgment order.
Disposition
Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted the parties’ administrative motion to seal at docket entry 776.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.