Opinion
CASE NO. 2:11-cv-01541-KJM-JFM
10-05-2011
BERSTER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC doing business as CHIP CONNECT, a California limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. COY CHRISTMAS, an individual, JIM RONDING, an individual, BGRMODS, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, CALIBUR11, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, and EINSTEINMODZ, a Wisconsin limited liability company, Defendants.
DLA PIPER LLP (US) By SCOTT W. PINK RAJIV DHARNIDHARKA Attorneys for Plaintiff BERSTER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC doing business as CHIP CONNECT KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP By PAUL ANDRE LISA KOBIALKA YURIDIA CAIRE HAROLD M. STORY Attorneys for Defendants COY CHRISTMAS, BGRMODS, LLC, CALIBUR11, LLC and EINSTEINMODZ
SCOTT W. PINK (Bar No. 122383)
RAJIV DHARNIDHARKA (Bar No. 234756)
DANIEL J. CROXALL (Bar No. 258390)
ASHLEY H. JOYCE (Bar No. 272549)
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
BERSTER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC doing business
as CHIP CONNECT
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO LODGE MATERIAL DEFENDANTS DEEM SEALABLE TO
ALLOW DEFENDANTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO FILE A REQUEST TO SEAL
Judge: Hon. Kimberly J. Mueller
1. On August 30, 2011 Defendants produced documents designated Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only.
2. The parties do not have a protective order regarding confidentiality in place under Local Rule 141.1.
3. Defendants produced documents believing that the documents would be treated as Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only.
4. Magistrate Judge Moulds issued an order yesterday, October 4, 2011, which did not enter a protective order regarding confidentiality. See Dkt. No. 78 at 9:7-10 (ordering parties to meet and confer regarding protective order, but not entering either parties' version of protective order).
5. Plaintiff intends to file material with its reply brief (due today) in support of its Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. No. 56) that includes materials Defendants' deem to be Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only and that Defendants deem to be sealable under Local Rules 138, 140 and 141.
6. Plaintiff does not believe that the materials in question are sealable under Local Rules 138, 140 and 141 or Confidential or Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only.
7. The parties desire to reach an agreement as to how the sealing matter and the material in question should be presented to the Court. Plaintiff wishes to file the material publically, but is willing to give Defendants the opportunity to bring a Request to Seal pursuant to Local Rule 141. Defendants would like the opportunity to establish that the material in question is sealable and ascertain a sealing order.
8. The parties stipulate to the following procedure for Plaintiff to lodge its reply brief and declaration containing material Defendants believe to be sealable pending a Request to Seal to be filed by Defendants, which they respectfully request the Court adopt as its order:
a. Plaintiff will e-file redacted versions of its reply brief and the declaration containing material Defendants believe to be sealable today, with all other reply papers in support of its motion for injunction, including a notice of lodging materials under seal pending a Request to Seal to be filed by Defendants;
b. Plaintiff will lodge with the Court unredacted versions of its reply brief and the declaration containing material Defendants believe to be sealable today;
c. By Friday, October 7, 2011 at noon, Defendants will file a Request to Seal the materials lodged by Plaintiff;
d. By Monday, October 10, 2011 at 5:00 p.m., Plaintiff will file its opposition to the Request to Seal; and
e. The Court at its discretion may rule upon the Request to Seal either without hearing or hold oral argument during the October 12, 2011 hearing on Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
By SCOTT W. PINK
RAJIV DHARNIDHARKA
Attorneys for Plaintiff
BERSTER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC doing
business as CHIP CONNECT
KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL
LLP
By PAUL ANDRE
LISA KOBIALKA
YURIDIA CAIRE
HAROLD M. STORY
Attorneys for Defendants
COY CHRISTMAS, BGRMODS, LLC,
CALIBUR11, LLC and EINSTEINMODZ
ATTESTATION CLAUSE
I attest under penalty of perjury that the concurrence in the filing of this document has een obtained from its signatories.
By: RAJIV DHARNIDHARKA PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE