`
`_________________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_________________________________________________
`
`GOOGLE LLC
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`DDC TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
`
`Patent Owner
`
`_________________________________________________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 11,093,001
`
`Case No.: IPR2023-00711
`
`_________________________________________________
`
`PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SEAL
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.14, Petitioner Google hereby moves to seal
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owners Preliminary Response (Reply Brief) and
`
`Exhibit 1019 filed with the Reply Brief. These documents contain confidential
`
`information pertaining to a confidential mediation.
`
`I.
`
`Good Cause Exists for Sealing the Exhibit and the Reply Brief
`
`In deciding whether to seal documents, the Board must find “good cause,”
`
`and must “strike a balance between the public’s interest in maintaining a complete
`
`and understandable file history and the parties’ interest in protecting truly sensitive
`
`information.” Garmin v. Cuozzo, IPR2012-00001, Paper 36 (April 5, 2013).
`
`Here, the balance tips in favor of protecting this confidential information.
`
`Exhibit 1019 is an agreement for a confidential mediation and the Reply Brief
`
`references that agreement. This exhibit and the Reply Brief’s description have
`
`nothing to do with patentability. For this reason, the public’s interest in having
`
`access to the Reply Brief and Exhibit 1019 is greatly lessened. Garmin v. Cuozzo,
`
`IPR2012-00001, Paper 36 at 8-9 (April 5, 2013). Petitioner requests that the
`
`following documents should remain under seal:
`
`Document
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`
`EX1019 – Agreement to Mediate
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`In addition to referencing the confidential mediation agreement, Petitioner’s
`
`Reply Brief also references confidential agreements between Google and Orora
`
`Packaging Solutions, which are already subject to a motion to seal (see Paper 12).
`
`EX1019 is the confidential mediation agreement. This information is confidential
`
`business information and should remain under seal.
`
`II. Non-Confidential Version of the Reply Brief
`
`Petitioner is concurrently filing a non-confidential version of the Reply
`
`Brief.
`
`III. Protective Order
`
`The parties have agreed to a protective order, which is an exhibit to Patent
`
`Owner’s Motion to Seal, Paper 12. This motion to seal is pending.
`
`IV. Certification of Non-Publication
`
`The information sought to be sealed has not been published or otherwise
`
`made public.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Dated: September 1, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`Michael L. Kiklis______
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`Michael L. Kiklis
`Reg. No. 38,939
`Attorney for Petitioner
`Google LLC
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies service pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) of
`
`PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SEAL by filing this document through the USPTO
`
`Patent Trial and Appeal Case Tracking System and by emailing a copy to the
`
`following email addresses:
`
`mholohan@sheridanross.com
`rbrunelli@sheridanross.com
`DDC-Service_Google-IPRs@sheridanross.com
`
`
`
`Dated: September 1, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`Michael L. Kiklis______
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`Michael L. Kiklis
`Reg. No. 38,939
`Attorney for Petitioner
`Google LLC
`
`
`
`
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
