Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. v. Insight Photonics Solutions, Inc.

Background

Zeiss, represented by counsel, asked for permission to file nine confidential exhibits under seal. The exhibits were attached to declarations supporting Insight’s motion for summary judgment and Zeiss’s opposition to that motion. The request identified Exhibits 5, 12, 20, 21, and 28 to the declaration supporting Zeiss’s opposition, and Exhibits F, G, I, and J to the declaration supporting Insight’s motion.

Basis for the Request

Zeiss’s counsel stated that the exhibits contained highly confidential, competitively sensitive, and proprietary information about Zeiss’s business and technology-development plans. Counsel argued that public disclosure would likely prejudice Zeiss by exposing it to competitive harm. The request also stated that the parties had filed 50 exhibits in connection with the summary-judgment motion, excluding exhibits that might be filed with Insight’s reply, while Zeiss sought to seal only nine exhibits.

Ruling

Judge Nelson Stephen Roman granted Zeiss’s request to file the identified documents under seal. He directed the Clerk to place ECF Nos. 64-6, 64-7, 64-9, 64-10, 70-5, 70-12, 70-20, 70-21, and 70-28 under seal, accessible only to the court and the parties. He also directed the Clerk to terminate the motion at ECF No. 59. This order addressed sealing and did not decide the parties’ summary-judgment dispute.