UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_________________________
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_________________________
`
` CODE200, UAB; TESO LT, UAB; METACLUSTER LT, UAB;
`OXYSALES, UAB; AND CORETECH LT, UAB,
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`BRIGHT DATA LTD.,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`_________________________
`
`Case IPR2021-01492
`
`Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`_________________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION TO SEAL AND
`TO ENTER THE JOINT PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`_________________________
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_________________________
`
` CODE200, UAB; TESO LT, UAB; METACLUSTER LT, UAB;
`OXYSALES, UAB; AND CORETECH LT, UAB,
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`BRIGHT DATA LTD.,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`_________________________
`
`Case IPR2021-01492
`
`Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`_________________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION TO SEAL AND
`TO ENTER THE JOINT PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`I. RELIEF REQUESTED .................................................................................. 1
`
`II. LEGAL STANDARD ..................................................................................... 1
`
`III. SEALING OF EXHIBITS 2039, 2041-2044, AND 2065 ............................. 2
`
`A. EXHIBIT 2039 (NETWORK DIAGRAM) .............................................. 2
`B. EXHIBITS 2041-2044 (SOURCE CODE FILES) ................................... 3
`C. EXHIBIT 2065 (EXPERT DECLARATION) ......................................... 5
`
`IV. SEALING OF THE PATENT OWNER RESPONSE ................................ 6
`
`V. ENTRY OF THE JOINT PROTECTIVE ORDER .................................... 6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`
`EX. 2001 Jury Verdict, Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso
`LT, UAB a/k/a UAB Teso LT, et al., No. 2:19-cv-395-JRG, Dkt. 516
`(E.D. Tex. Nov. 5, 2021)
`
`EX. 2002 Plaintiff Bright Data Ltd.’s Disclosure of Proposed Claim Terms for
`Construction, dated December 8, 2021, in the case of Bright Data
`Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., Case No. 2:21-cv-225-JRG (E.D. Tex.)
`
`EX. 2003 Docket Control Order, Bright Data Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., Case No.
`2:21-cv-225-JRG, Dkt. 56 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 22, 2021)
`
`EX. 2004 Order on Pretrial Motions and Motions in Limine, Data Ltd. f/k/a
`Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB a/k/a UAB Teso LT, et al.,
`No. 2:19-cv-395-JRG, Dkt. 476 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 9, 2021)
`
`EX. 2005 Applicant Remarks, dated October 18, 2018, regarding Application
`No. 15/957,945 which issued as Patent No. 10,257,319 (previously
`submitted in IPR2020-01266 as EX. 2008)
`
`EX. 2006 Declaration of Dr. V. Thomas Rhyne (previously submitted in
`IPR2020-01266 as EX. 2012)
`
`EX. 2007 Plaintiff’s Sur-reply in opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss,
`Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB a/k/a
`UAB Teso LT, et al., No. 2:19-cv-395-JRG, Dkt. 47 (E.D. Tex. May
`5, 2020)
`
`EX. 2008 Order, Boxcast Inc., v. Resi Media LLC, et al., No. 2:21-cv-217-JRG,
`Dkt. 55 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 1, 2021)
`
`EX. 2009 Order, Oyster Optics, LLC v. Infinera Corp., et al., No. 2:19-cv-257-
`JRG, Dkt. 87 (E.D. Tex. July 17, 2020)
`
`EX. 2010 Declaration of Mr. Thomas M. Dunham
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`
`
`
`EX. 2011 Order, Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Ringcentral, Inc., No. 2-17-cv-354, Dkt.
`100 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 12, 2018)
`
`EX. 2012 Motion, Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Ringcentral, Inc., No. 2-17-cv-354, Dkt.
`97 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 8, 2018)
`
`EX. 2013 Order, Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Ringcentral, Inc., No. 2-17-cv-354, Dkt.
`99 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 9, 2018)
`
`EX. 2014 Joint Motion, Bright Data Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-225, Dkt.
`79 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 22, 2021)
`
`EX. 2015 Motion, Bright Data Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-225, Dkt. 80
`(E.D. Tex. Dec. 23, 2021)
`
`EX. 2016 Letter, dated Dec. 30, 2021, from Bright Data Ltd. to NetNut Ltd.
`regarding the scheduling of depositions in the case of Bright Data
`Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-225 (E.D. Tex.)
`
`EX. 2017 Declaration of Mr. Thomas M. Dunham
`
`EX. 2018 Order, Bright Data Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd., No. 2:21-cv-225, Dkt. 153
`(E.D. Tex. May 17, 2022)
`
`EX. 2019 Settlement Agreement between Bright Data Ltd. and NetNut Ltd. –
`BOARD ONLY (as of December 7, 2022)
`
`EX. 2020 Declaration of Robert M. Harkins
`
`EX. 2021 Claim Construction Order (Dkt. 146) in the case of Bright Data Ltd.
`v. NetNut Ltd., Case No. 2:21-cv-00225 (E.D. Tex. May 10, 2022)
`
`EX. 2022 Order, Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Code200,
`UAB, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-396-JRG, Dkt. 97 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 8,
`2021)
`
`EX. 2023 Order, Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Code200,
`UAB, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-396-JRG, Dkt. 98 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 9,
`2021)
`
`iii
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`EX. 2024 Order, Bright Data Ltd. f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT,
`UAB a/k/a UAB Teso LT, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-395-JRG, Dkt. 303
`(E.D. Tex. Feb. 12, 2021)
`
`EX. 2025 Patent No. 10,069,936
`
`EX. 2026 Prosecution History of Patent No. 10,069,936
`
`EX. 2027 U.S. Patent No. 10,491,713
`
`EX. 2028 U.S. Patent No. 11,050,852
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510
`
`EX. 2029
`
`EX. 2030 Definition “Consumer”, Cambridge English Dictionary; accessed at
`https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/consumer on
`June 10, 2022
`
`EX. 2031 Definition “Consumer”, Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary,
`copyright 2008, ISBN 978-0-521-71266-8
`
`EX. 2032 Definition “Consumer”, Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary,
`copyright 2009, ISBN 978-0-521-69196-3
`
`EX. 2033 Definition “Consumer”, Collins English Dictionary; accessed at
`https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/consumer
`on June 10, 2022
`
`EX. 2034 Definition “Consumer”, Collins COBUILD Advanced Dictionary of
`American English, copyright 2007, ISBN 978-1-4240-0363-1
`
`EX. 2035 Network Fundamentals Study Guide, published February 17, 2015;
`accessed at https://www.webopedia.com/reference/network-
`fundamentals-studyguide/#topologies on June 14, 2022
`
`EX. 2036 Excerpts from Tanenbaum, A., et al., “Computer Networks – Fifth
`Edition”, copyright 2011, ISBN 0-13-212695-8
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`
`
`
`EX. 2037 Excerpts from Tanenbaum, A, “Computer Networks – Fourth
`Edition”, copyright 2003, ISBN 0-13-066102-3
`
`EX. 2038 Bright Data, “Residential Proxy Network”, accessed at
`https://brightdata.com/proxy-types/residential-proxies on July 29,
`2022
`
`EX. 2039 Bright Data, Network Diagram – HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`EX. 2040 Appendix to Declaration of Dr. Tim A. Williams
`
`EX. 2041 Source Code File 1 of 4 - HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY – SOURCE CODE
`
`EX. 2042 Source Code File 2 of 4 - HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY – SOURCE CODE
`
`EX. 2043 Source Code File 3 of 4 - HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY – SOURCE CODE
`
`EX. 2044 Source Code File 4 of 4 - HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY – SOURCE CODE
`
`EX. 2045 EMK Capital, “EMK acquires Luminati”, published August 10,
`2017; accessed at https://www.emkcapital.com/emk-acquires-
`luminati-worlds-largest-ip-proxy-network-brings-transparency-
`internet/ on July 29, 2022
`
`EX. 2046 Frost & Sullivan Report, “Global IP Proxy Networks Market,”
`published July 2019
`
`EX. 2047 Excerpts from Trial Transcript, Day 3 in the case of Bright Data Ltd.
`f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB a/k/a UAB Teso LT,
`et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-00395 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 3, 2021)
`
`EX. 2048 Bright Data, “Proxy Services”, accessed at
`https://brightdata.com/proxy-types on July 29, 2022
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`
`
`
`EX. 2049 Excerpts from Trial Transcript, Day 1 in the case of Bright Data Ltd.
`f/k/a Luminati Networks Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB a/k/a UAB Teso LT,
`et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-00395 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 1, 2021)
`
`EX. 2050 Oxylabs, “Legal Timeline Between Oxylabs and Luminati (now
`Bright Data)”, accessed at https://oxylabs.io/legal-timeline on
`August 4, 2022
`
`EX. 2051 Earthweb, “16 Best Residential Proxies to Buy in 2022”, last updated
`May 19, 2022; accessed at https://earthweb.com/residential-proxies/
`on May 19, 2022
`
`EX. 2052 SmartProxy, “What is the difference between residential and
`datacenter proxies?”, published June 3, 2021; accessed at
`https://smartproxy.com/blog/what-is-the-difference-between-proxy-
`servers-and-data-centers on May 19, 2022
`
`EX. 2053 Microleaves, “Backconnect Residential Proxies”, accessed at
`https://web.archive.org/web/20170913105635/https://microleaves.co
`m/services/backconnect-proxies?promotion=dNPa on May 20, 2022
`
`EX. 2054 Oxylabs, “Residential Proxies,” accessed at
`https://web.archive.org/web/20200701171337/https://oxylabs.io/prod
`ucts/residential-proxy-pool on May 20, 2022
`
`EX. 2055 Bright Data, “When should I use the residential network?”, accessed
`at https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/4413156951825-
`When-should-I-use-the-residential-network- on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2056 Bright Data, “Cost effectiveness of residential IPs”, accessed at
`https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/4413161607441-Cost-
`effectiveness-of-residential-IPs on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2057 Bright Data, “Using the system”, accessed at
`https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/4413167165969-Using-
`the-system on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2058 Bright Data, “Which ports and protocols are supported by Bright
`Data?”, accessed at https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-
`
`vi
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`
`
`
`us/articles/4413222000017-Which-ports-and-protocols-are-
`supported-by-Bright-Data- on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2059 Bright Data, “How do I integrate Bright Data as my proxy
`network?”, accessed at https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-
`us/articles/4413213552273-How-do-I-integrate-Bright-Data-as-my-
`proxy-network- on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2060 Bright Data, “How do I integrate Bright Data into a web browser
`automation tool?”, accessed at https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-
`us/articles/4413213588369-How-do-I-integrate-Bright-Data-into-a-
`web-browser-automation-tool- on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2061 Bright Data, “What is Bright Data Proxy Browser Extension?”,
`accessed at https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-
`us/articles/4413213983633-What-is-Bright-Data-Proxy-Browser-
`Extension- on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2062 Wikipedia, “Domain Name System”, accessed at
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System on August 2,
`2022
`
`EX. 2063 Wikipedia, “Domain Name System”, dated March 20, 2009 accessed
`at
`https://web.archive.org/web/20090320152858/https://en.wikipedia.or
`g/wiki/Domain_Name_System on August 17, 2022
`
`EX. 2064 Bright Data, “Using BrightData in Android settings”, accessed at
`https://help.brightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/4413168253969-Using-
`BrightData-in-Android-settings on August 2, 2022
`
`EX. 2065 Declaration of Dr. Tim A. Williams – HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL –
`OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY
`
`EX. 2066 Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 10,484,510, originally
`submitted in IPR2021-01493 as EX. 1002
`
`EX. 2067 Deposition Transcript of Mr. Keith J. Teruya (December 15, 2022)
`
`
`vii
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`EX. 2068 Joint Protective Order
`
`EX. 2069 Redlined version of the Joint Protective Order (compared to Default
`Protective Order)
`
`EX. 2070 Executed Acknowledgements from Dr. Tim A. Williams, by lead
`counsel for Patent Owner, and by first back-up counsel for Patent
`Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`viii
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`RELIEF REQUESTED
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.54, Patent Owner respectfully requests the
`
`following:
`
`First, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board grant this Motion to
`
`Seal Exhibits 2039, 2041-2044, and 2065, which contain highly confidential
`
`material.
`
`Second, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board grant this Motion
`
`to Seal the Patent Owner Response, which contains highly confidential material.
`
` Third, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board enter the Joint
`
`Protective Order (EX. 2068).
`
`Petitioners do not oppose this Motion.
`
`II. LEGAL STANDARD
`
`The Board may, for good cause, issue an order to protect a party or person
`
`from disclosing confidential information, including, but not limited to, “[r]equiring
`
`that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial
`
`information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way.” 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.54(a)(7).
`
`A party may file a motion to seal where the motion to seal contains a
`
`proposed protective order and a certification that the moving party has in good
`
`faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties. 37 C.F.R. §
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`42.54(a). Generally, “a movant to seal must demonstrate adequately that (1) the
`
`information sought to be sealed is truly confidential, (2) a concrete harm would
`
`result upon public disclosure, (3) there exists a genuine need to rely in the trial on
`
`the specific information sought to be sealed, and (4), on balance, an interest in
`
`maintaining confidentiality outweighs the strong public interest in having an open
`
`record.” Corning Optical Commc’ns RF, LLC v. PPC Broadband, Inc., Case
`
`IPR2014-00736, Paper 38, at 2-3 (PTAB Apr. 14, 2015).
`
`III. SEALING OF EXHIBITS 2039, 2041-2044, AND 2065
`
`A. EXHIBIT 2039 (NETWORK DIAGRAM)
`
`Confidentiality: Exhibit 2039 is a highly sensitive, technical, network
`
`diagram of Patent Owner’s commercial services, which has not been publicly
`
`disclosed and Patent Owner has taken steps to guard against its disclosure in, for
`
`example, pending district court litigations. E.g., Bright Data Ltd. v. Teso LT, UAB,
`
`et al., No. 2:19-cv-395 (E.D. Tex.)(“Teso Litigation”), Bright Data Ltd. v.
`
`Code200, UAB, et al., No. 2:19-cv-396 (E.D. Tex.)(“Code200 Litigation”), Bright
`
`Data Ltd. v. Tefincom SA, No. 2:19-cv-414 (E.D. Tex.)(“Tefincom Litigation”).
`
`Exhibit 2039 consists entirely of material designated as “HIGHLY
`
`CONFIDENTAL – OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” such that redaction
`
`would not be practical. Exhibit 2039 requires filing entirely under seal and
`
`accordingly, no public version of Exhibit 2039 has been filed.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Consequences of disclosure: Patent Owner would be significantly harmed by
`
`disclosure of Exhibit 2039 insofar as its competitors would be able to access
`
`sensitive technical details regarding Patent Owner’s commercial services.
`
`Importance: Exhibit 2039 is referenced in the expert declaration (Exhibit
`
`2065), the appendix to the expert declaration (Exhibit 2040), and the Patent Owner
`
`Response (“POR”). Patent Owner, and its expert, rely on Exhibit 2039 to provide
`
`context to Patent Owner’s source code (see discussion of Exhibits 2041-2044
`
`below) and to establish nexus as it relates, in particular, to secondary
`
`considerations of non-obviousness. Exhibit 2039 provides the best evidence of the
`
`technical details of Patent Owner’s commercial services and there are no public
`
`versions of the network diagram.
`
`Balance of interests: Patent Owner’s interest in protecting this highly
`
`sensitive information outweighs the Public’s interest in a complete file history. To
`
`serve the Public’s interest, public versions of the expert declaration and the POR
`
`are submitted concurrently. The harm to Patent Owner, if Exhibit 2039 were
`
`disclosed, and Patent Owner’s need to rely on Exhibit 2039, favor sealing Exhibit
`
`2039.
`
`Accordingly, good cause exists to seal Exhibit 2039.
`
`B. EXHIBITS 2041-2044 (SOURCE CODE FILES)
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Confidentiality: Exhibits 2041-2044 contain highly sensitive source code,
`
`which has not been publicly disclosed and Patent Owner has taken steps to guard
`
`against its disclosure in, for example, pending district court litigations. E.g., the
`
`Teso, Code200, and Tefincom Litigations. Exhibits 2041-2044 consist entirely of
`
`material designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTAL – OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’
`
`EYES ONLY” such that redaction would not be practical. Exhibits 2041-2044 are
`
`additionally designated as “SOURCE CODE” subject to the restrictions on
`
`printing, transport, and transmission in the Joint Protective Order (EX. 2068)
`
`discussed below. Exhibits 2041-2044 require filing entirely under seal and
`
`accordingly, no public versions of these exhibits have been filed.
`
`Consequences of disclosure: Patent Owner would be significantly harmed by
`
`disclosure of Exhibits 2041-2044 insofar as its competitors would be able to access
`
`sensitive technical details regarding Patent Owner’s source code.
`
`Importance: Exhibits 2041-2044 are referenced in the expert declaration
`
`(Exhibit 2065), the appendix to the expert declaration (Exhibit 2040), and the POR.
`
`Patent Owner, and its expert, rely on Exhibits 2041-2044 to show the operation of
`
`Patent Owner’s commercial services and to establish nexus as it relates, in
`
`particular, to secondary considerations of non-obviousness. Exhibits 2041-2044
`
`provide the best evidence of the technical details of Patent Owner’s commercial
`
`services and there are no public versions of the source code.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Balance of interests: Patent Owner’s interest in protecting this highly
`
`sensitive information outweighs the Public’s interest in a complete file history. To
`
`serve the Public’s interest, public versions of the expert declaration and the POR
`
`are submitted concurrently. The harm to Patent Owner, if Exhibits 2041-2044 were
`
`disclosed, and Patent Owner’s need to rely on Exhibits 2041-2044, favor sealing
`
`Exhibits 2041-2044.
`
`Accordingly, good cause exists to seal Exhibit 2041-2044.
`
`C. EXHIBIT 2065 (EXPERT DECLARATION)
`
`Exhibit 2065 is the expert declaration, which references highly sensitive
`
`material in Exhibits 2039 and 2041-2044, discussed above. Additionally, Exhibit
`
`2065 references highly sensitive financial information, including monthly revenue
`
`of Patent Owner’s commercial services. Patent Owner has taken steps to guard
`
`against the disclosure of this highly sensitive material in, for example, pending
`
`district court litigations. E.g., the Teso, Code200, and Tefincom Litigations.
`
`Exhibit 2065 is designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE
`
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”.
`
`To serve the Public’s interest, a public version of the expert declaration is
`
`submitted concurrently. The public version redacts information that refers to or
`
`incorporates highly sensitive material. For the same reasons as discussed above,
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`the harm to Patent Owner, if Exhibit 2065 were disclosed in its entirety, and Patent
`
`Owner’s need to rely on Exhibit 2065, favor sealing Exhibit 2065.
`
`IV. SEALING OF THE PATENT OWNER RESPONSE
`
`The POR references highly sensitive material in Exhibits 2039, 2041-2044,
`
`and 2065, discussed above. The POR is designated as “HIGHLY
`
`CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”. To serve the
`
`Public’s interest, a public version of the POR is submitted concurrently. The public
`
`version redacts information that refers to or incorporates highly sensitive material
`
`from Exhibits 2039, 2041-2044, and 2065. For the same reasons as discussed
`
`above, the harm to Patent Owner, if the POR were disclosed in its entirety, and
`
`Patent Owner’s need to submit the POR to defend the validity of the challenged
`
`patent, favor sealing the POR.
`
`V. ENTRY OF THE JOINT PROTECTIVE ORDER
`
`With this Motion to Seal, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`enter the Joint Protective Order (EX. 2068). Patent Owner respectfully submits that
`
`the Joint Protective Order (EX. 2068) is consistent with the integrity and efficient
`
`administration of the proceeding. See Consolidated Trial Practice Guide
`
`(November 2019)(“TPG”) at 115. The parties have agreed to the terms of the Joint
`
`Protective Order and Petitioners do not oppose this Motion.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`The Joint Protective Order is based on the Board’s default protective order,
`
`with modifications as shown in the Redlined Version of the Joint Protective Order
`
`(EX. 2069). The Joint Protective Order deviates from the Board’s default
`
`protective order primarily by defining two levels of confidentiality:
`
`“CONFIDENTIAL” and “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE
`
`ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY”. The Joint Protective Order includes a second tier
`
`for “highly confidential” material that is for “outside attorneys’ eyes only” and not
`
`to be shared with the petitioners or their in-house counsel. See EX. 2068,
`
`paragraph 5. As outlined in paragraph 4 of the Joint Protective Order, “highly
`
`confidential” material may include unpublished technical information, trade secret
`
`information, financial information, or computer source code. These modifications
`
`are directed to preserving the highly confidential nature of Bright Data’s network
`
`diagram, financial information, and source code, which require a higher level of
`
`protection than what is offered in the default protective order.
`
`Due to the highly confidential nature of computer source code, the
`
`producing party is to clearly mark computer source code as “SOURCE CODE”
`
`subject to the additional provisions for “source code material” and “source code
`
`documents” outlined in paragraph 6 of the Joint Protective Order. The provisions
`
`in paragraph 6 of the Joint Protective Order relate to printing, transport, and
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`transmission of “source code material” and “source code documents” that include
`
`excerpts of source code material.
`
`Patent Owner certifies that it has in good faith conferred with
`
`Petitioners and the parties have no disputes regarding the Joint Protective
`
`Order.
`
`Patent Owner respectfully submits that the proposed modifications are
`
`appropriate for at least four reasons:
`
`First, the parties agree to the proposed modifications, which are consistent
`
`with the integrity and efficient administration of the proceeding. “The Board will
`
`consider changes agreed to by the parties, and generally will accept such proposed
`
`changes if they are consistent with the integrity and efficient administration of the
`
`proceedings.” TPG at 115.
`
`Second, this highly sensitive information has been previously produced in
`
`pending district court litigations, e.g., the Teso, Code200, and Tefincom
`
`Litigations, and was previously marked with confidentiality designations based on
`
`the District Court Protective Order in each of those cases. Those protections should
`
`be maintained in this proceeding.
`
`Third, Patent Owner would be significantly harmed if this highly sensitive
`
`material were disclosed to the petitioners or in-house counsel to the petitioners,
`
`given the business nature of the confidential information. Petitioners and Patent
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Owner are competitors in the same market and are involved in pending district
`
`court litigations. E.g., the Teso and Code200 Litigations.
`
`Fourth, the Board has previously granted modified protective orders with a
`
`“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY” tier.
`
`See, e.g., Varian Medical Systems, Inc., et al. v. Best Medical International, Inc.,
`
`IPR2020-00071, Paper 43 at 4-5 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2020)(granting proposed
`
`modifications in Paper 32); see also, e.g., Echelon Fitness Multimedia, LLC v.
`
`Peloton Interactive, Inc., IPR2020-01541, Paper 56 at 87-88 (PTAB March 2,
`
`2022)(public version of Paper 54; granting proposed modifications in Paper 31).
`
`Thus, Patent Owner respectfully requests that the Board enter the Joint
`
`Protective Order (EX. 2068) in this proceeding. Furthermore, Patent Owner
`
`understands that the terms of a protective order take effect upon the filing of a
`
`Motion to Seal by a party, and remain in place until lifted or modified by the
`
`Board. See TPG at 107.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: January 6, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Thomas M. Dunham
`Thomas M. Dunham
`Reg. No. 39,965
`
`Cherian LLP
`1901 L Street NW, Suite 700
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 838-1567
`
`ATTORNEY FOR PATENT OWNER,
`BRIGHT DATA LTD.
`
`10
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPE-VOLUME LIMITS
`
`This Motion is within the 15 page-limit, in compliance with 37 C.F.R. §§
`
`42.24(a)(1)(v).
`
`
`
`
`Date: January 6, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Thomas M. Dunham
`Thomas M. Dunham
`Reg. No. 39,965
`
`Cherian LLP
`1901 L Street NW, Suite 700
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 838-1567
`
`ATTORNEY FOR PATENT OWNER,
`BRIGHT DATA LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2021-01492 of Patent No. 10,257,319
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned hereby certifies that
`
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION TO SEAL AND TO ENTER THE JOINT
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER and all exhibits thereto were served on the undersigned
`
`date via email, as authorized by Petitioner, at the following email addresses:
`
`jscott@ccrglaw.com
`
`jheuton@ccrglaw.com
`
`ctolliver@ccrglaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: January 6, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Thomas M. Dunham
`Thomas M. Dunham
`Reg. No. 39,965
`
`Cherian LLP
`1901 L Street NW, Suite 700
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 838-1567
`
`ATTORNEY FOR PATENT OWNER,
`BRIGHT DATA LTD.
`
`12
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
