From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Qualcomm Litig.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 15, 2019
Case No.: 3:17-cv-0108-GPC-mdd (S.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2019)

Opinion

Case No.: 3:17-cv-0108-GPC-mdd

04-15-2019

IN RE: QUALCOMM LITIGATION


ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO SEAL

[ECF Nos. 1101, 1113, 1073, 1076, 1116, 1090, 1110, 1087, 1085, 1099, 1095, 1102, 1118, 1091, 1083, 1105, 1093.]

Before the Court are numerous non-party requests to seal certain exhibits whose documents are among the "will call" exhibits and deposition designations that the parties may offer into evidence in Case No. 3:17-cv-00108-GPC-MDD. (ECF Nos. 1101, 1113, 1073, 1076, 1116, 1090, 1110, 1087, 1085, 1099, 1095, 1102, 1118, 1091, 1083, 1105, 1093.) Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm'') has filed a consolidated response to the motions to seal. ECF No. 1138. Apple Inc. ("Apple") and Compal Electronics, Inc., Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd., FIH Mobile Ltd., Pegatron Corporation, and Wistron Corporation (collectively, the "Contract Manufacturers" or "CMs") have submitted that they do not oppose any sealing motions filed by any non-parties in this action. (ECF No. 1136.) Upon review of the moving papers, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motions.

LEGAL STANDARD

There is a presumptive right of public access to court records based upon the common law and the first amendment. See Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978); Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. General Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1212-13 (9th Cir. 2002). Nonetheless, access may be denied to protect sensitive confidential information. Courts are more likely to protect information covered by Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but are not limited by items listed in protective orders. See KL Group v. Case, Kay, & Lynch, 829 F.2d 909, 917-19 (9th Cir. 1987) (letter to client from attorney); Kalinauskas v. Wong, 151 F.R.D. 363, 365-67 (D. Nev. 1993) (confidential settlement agreement).

"Unless a particular court record is one traditionally kept secret, a strong presumption in favor of access is the starting point." Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178-80 (9th Cir. 2006) (citing Foltz v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 331 F.3d 1122, 1135 (9th Cir. 2003)). "In order to overcome this strong presumption, a party seeking to seal a judicial record must articulate justifications for sealing that outweigh the historical right of access and the public policies favoring disclosure." Id. at 1178-79.

The presumption of access is "based on the need for federal courts, although independent—indeed, particularly because they are independent—to have a measure of accountability and for the public to have confidence in the administration of justice." United States v. Amodeo (Amodeo II ), 71 F.3d 1044, 1048 (2d Cir.1995); see also Valley Broad. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court—D. Nev., 798 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir.1986) (explaining that the presumption of public access "promot[es] the public's understanding of the judicial process and of significant public events").

Accordingly, "[a] party seeking to seal a judicial record then bears the burden of overcoming this strong presumption by meeting the 'compelling reasons' standard." Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1178. Under this stringent standard, a court may seal records only when it finds "a compelling reason and articulate[s] the factual basis for its ruling, without relying on hypothesis or conjecture." Id. at 1179. The court must then "conscientiously balance[ ] the competing interests of the public and the party who seeks to keep certain judicial records secret." Id. (quoting Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1135) (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted). What constitutes a "compelling reason" is "best left to the sound discretion of the trial court." Nixon, 435 U.S. at 599.

Previously, some courts applied a "compelling reason" or "good cause" standard for sealing depending on whether the pending motion was dispositive or non-dispositive. E.g., Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1180 (9th Cir. 2006) (parties seeking to seal documents in a dispositive motion must provide "compelling reasons" to support a sealing whereas for non-dispositive motions the parties must show a lesser "particularized showing" under the "good cause" standard pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)); Phillips ex rel. Estates of Byrd v. Gen. Motors Corp., 307 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2002) (when a party attaches a sealed discovery document to a nondispositive motion, the usual presumption of the public's right of access is rebutted).

Other courts rejected this binary approach. In re Midland National Life Insurance Company Annuity Sales Practices Litigation, 686 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir.2012), is one such case that rejected the literal dispositive/nondispositive label. In that case, an intervenor moved to unseal documents attached to a Daubert motion. Id. at 1118. The district court, like the district court here, concluded that the documents should remain under seal because "the Daubert motion was non-dispositive," as it "would not have been a determination on the merits of any claim or defense." Id. at 1119. The Ninth Circuit rejected the district court's focus on whether the motion was literally "dispositive": "That the records are connected to a Daubert motion does not, on its own, conclusively resolve the issue." Id. As the motion, in effect, "pertain[ed] to central issues bearing on defendant's summary judgment motion," we treated that motion as dispositive. Id. Similarly, the court in Ctr. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1100 (9th Cir. 2016) observed that it would not allow the technically nondispositive nature of a Daubert motion to cloud the reality that it was able to significantly affect the disposition of the issues in the case.

Here, the motions to seal relate to numerous potential trial exhibits and deposition designations that the parties may intend to call into evidence at trial. This Court will apply the "compelling reasons" standard to these motions and related briefing as those submissions pertain to central issues at trial and are "more than tangentially related to the underlying cause of action." Ctrs. for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Grp., 809 F.3d 1092, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016).

Compelling reasons for sealing information exist "when such 'court files might have become a vehicle for improper purposes,' such as the use of records to gratify private spite, promote public scandal, circulate libelous statements, or release trade secrets." Kamakana, 447 F.3d at 1179 (quoting Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598). Trade secrets "may consist of any formula, pattern, device or compilation of information which is used in one's business, and which gives him an opportunity to obtain advantage over competitions who do not know or use it." Restatement (First) of Torts § 757 cmt. b. Because trade secrets concern proprietary and sensitive business information not available to the public, sealing may be warranted where disclosure would harm a litigant's competitive standing. Nixon, 425 U.S. at 598.

The Ninth Circuit has explicitly recognized that compelling reasons exist for the sealing of "pricing terms, royalty rates, and guaranteed minimum payment terms" of license agreements. See In re Elec. Arts, Inc., 298 F. App'x 568, 569 (9th Cir. 2008). Courts in this circuit have also recognized that information subject to confidentiality agreements may also meet the "compelling reasons" standard when accompanied by a particularized factual showing. See Foltz, 331 F.3d at 1137-38.

DISCUSSION

The Court now turns to the substance of the instant sealing motions. The majority of information that the movants seek to seal constitutes confidential business information of the parties, including trade secrets, proprietary business records, discussions of internal strategy, company dealings, and materials designated as "Highly Confidential." To the extent that the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored and relate to the rationale above, the Court agrees that the movants have demonstrated that compelling reasons exist for sealing the information subsumed by these categories. Analysis from this Court's prior orders granting the movants' motions to seal is applicable here. (See ECF Nos. 1143 and 1155.)

However, the Court also finds that some of the information that the movants seek to seal is stale, overbroad, or relate to key issues in the case. Even where the parties seek to cover information that may properly be sealed, they should seek to seal only the narrowly sealable information and not whole paragraphs, documents, sections, or presentations that do not justify extensive redaction. In some documents, the information at issue is too general to warrant sealing. Other suggested redactions would inappropriately shield stale information that is too old to be presently confidential. And yet other redacted exhibits in their current states would close from the public exhibits that relate to issues at the heart of this case, including a variety of SULAs, testimony about Qualcomm's rates and Qualcomm's leverage. In light of the public's right to access, this Court finds no colorable justification to seal those exhibits in their presently proposed form. Repeated requests to close and clear the courtroom would be unduly cumbersome to the Court's interest in managing the trial. Sealing such information would hamstring the parties and stymie them from litigating key issues effectively and efficiently. Furthermore, over-sealing crucial exhibits would impede the jury and the public's ability to understand the nature of the proceedings and the factual basis for the parties' claims.

As such, the Court finds that the movants have not articulated "compelling reasons" to keep all the requested information from the public. Accordingly, the sealing motions at ECF Nos. 1076, 1083, 1091, 1101, 1113, 1073, 1095, 1099, 1118, 1105 filed by Asustek, AT&T, Ericsson, Kyocera, LGE, HTC, Lenovo/Motorola, ZTE, Nokia, Ericsson, and Interdigital are GRANTED. The sealing motions at ECF Nos. 1116, 1110, 1085, 1090, 1087, 1102, and 1093 are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Court instructs the parties to introduce - if called at trial - redacted versions of their documents consistent with the following tables.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 15, 2019

/s/_________

Hon. Gonzalo P. Curiel

United States District Judge

ASUSTek's Appendix A

Exhibit

Information To Be SealedAccording to ASUSTek

Ruling

DTX00842

Pages Bates stampedPegatron_0000807204 -0000807207

GRANTED.

PTX010198

Page Bates stampedQNDCAL02952131, thematerial indicated as ablack outline.

GRANTED.

AT&T's Appendix A

Exhibit

Information Sought to BeSealed According to AT&T

Ruling

DTX00298

Exhibit in full

GRANTED.

DTX00399

Exhibit in full

GRANTED.

DTX00401

Exhibit in full

GRANTED.

BlackBerry's Exhibit A Exhibits

Exhibit

Information Sought ToBe SealedAccording to BlackBerry

Basis for Objection

PTX000154

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit B to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX000891

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit C to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX000904

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit D to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX000910

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit E to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX001007

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit F to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX001238

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit G to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX002144

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit H to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

PTX003658

Portions highlighted inblue in Exhibit I to theGrubbs Decl.

GRANTED.

BlackBerry's Exhibit A Deposition Designations

DeponentName

Deposition Date

InformationSought to BeSealed

Basis for Objection

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

41:23-42:1

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

42:11-14

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

42:23-25

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

43:2-6

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

43:9

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

46:16-19

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

75:3

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

76:22

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

182:22-25

DENIED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

197:19-198:5

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

198:21-199:6

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

199:8-199:18

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

236:1-7

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

253:3-6

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

253:12-21

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

254:1-5

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

257:25-258:6

GRANTED.

Grubbs, John

3/1/2018

259:1-9

GRANTED.

Broadcom's Appendix A Exhibits

Exhibit

Information Soughtto Be SealedBy Broadcom

Ruling

DTX00523(BCRM00238)

BCRM000239-250

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX00526/PTX00 2235(BCRM000397)

BCRM00397-399

DENIED.

DTX00529(BRCM172776)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX00532(BRCM173163)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX00535(BRCM174046)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX00538(BRCM175716)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX00541(BROADCOM-USFTC00000100)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX01007(Q2017MDL3_00030289)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad and stale. TheCourt instructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX01005/ PTX03531(Q2017MDL3_00019 027)

Entirety

DENIED as overbroad and stale. TheCourt instructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

PTX00612 (ERIC-QCOMSDCA-00002083)

Pages 3-29

GRANTED.

PTX001302(BRCM173791)

Entirety

GRANTED.

PTX001321(BRCM176046)

Entirety

GRANTED.

PTX001955(BRCM174102)

Entirety

GRANTED.

Broadcom Appendix A Deposition Designations

Deponent Name

DepositionDate

Information Sought tobe Sealed byBroadcom

Ruling

McGregor, Scott

3/28/2018

17:4-21

DENIED.

McGregor, Scott

3/28/2018

175:23-176:18176:20-177:18179:11-180:20

DENIED.

McGregor, Scott

3/28/2018

184:11-24187:12-188:1

DENIED.

McGregor, Scott

3/28/2018

240:17-24

DENIED.

Ericsson Appendix A

Exhibit

Information Sought to BeSealed According toEricsson

Ruling

DTX00565

§§ 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, and7.5; App'x1; App'x 2

GRANTED.

PTX003665

Portion of §§ 2.1 and3.4.4

GRANTED.

PTX003657

§§ 4.1, 4.4

GRANTED.

PTX001179

Pages 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, and15Portions of pages 15, 16,17, 18, 19,and 26

GRANTED.

PTX001241

Pages 12, 17, and 18Portions of pages 13, 15,22, 69, 84,and 85

GRANTED.

PTX001251

Portions of pages 20, 31,38, 43, 49,and 54

GRANTED.

PTX002327

Portions of pages 5, 21,22, 26, and28

GRANTED.

PTX003066

Portion of second-to-lastparagraph

GRANTED.

DTX02568

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006414

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006415

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006416

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006417

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006418

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006421

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006422

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006423

Entire document

GRANTED.

PTX006424

Entire document

GRANTED.

HTC Appendix A

Will Call Exhibits

Exhibit

Information Sought to BeSealed According to HTC

Ruling

PTX003548

Up-front license feesamount under §3 of theSULA (p. 9) and up-frontlicense fees stated inletter dated December 20,2000 (p. 45)

GRANTED.

Other Exhibits HTC's up-front license fee amount under §3 of theSULA (p.10) and HTC'sup-front license fees stated in letter dated December20,2000 (p. 46) QC's contributions to HTC under §§ 2.2, 2.3, andstrategic fund cap amounts under §§ 2.4 and2.5 of Strategic FundAgreement (pp. 2 and 3) HTC's up-front license fees amount under §3 ofthe SULA (p. 12) QC's fund payments (annual cap, quarterlyreimbursement cap and expenditure) to HTC under§§ 1, 2, 3 (pp.1-4, 6), price calculation in Exhibit A(p. 12) and quarter caps in Exhibit B under StrategicAgreement (p. 13). QC's contributions to HTC under §§ 2.2, 2.3, andstrategic fund cap and amounts under §§2.4 and 2.5 of Strategic Fund Agreement (pp. 2 and 3) QC's NRE payments to HTC under §2 of NRE andDevelopment Agreement for Multiple SubscriberUnits (p. 1)QC's fund payments (annual cap, quarterlyreimbursement cap and expenditure) to HTC under§§1, 2, 3 (pp. 6-9, 11),price calculation in Exhibit A (p. 17) and quarter capsin ExhibitB under StrategicAgreement (p. 18) QC's reimbursement amounts to HTC (p. 5)

Exhibit

Information Sought to Be Sealed According toHTC

Ruling

DTX03585

GRANTED.

DTX03661

GRANTED.

DTX04555

GRANTED.

PTX003635

GRANTED.

PTX003789

GRANTED.

PTX001512

GRANTED.

PTX001609

GRANTED.

Huawei's Appendix A

DTX01440

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages with Bates ending 1237, 1238,1239, and 1241.

GRANTED.

DTX01454

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages with Bates ending 5611 and5612.

GRANTED.

DTX15685

Seal in its entirety.

GRANTED.

PTX001861

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 002-012.

GRANTED.

PTX001869

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 001 and 003.

GRANTED.

PTX001916

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 001-004.

GRANTED.

PTX001941

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 002-005.

GRANTED.

PTX001963

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages with Bates ending 1222, 1224,and 1226-1230.

GRANTED.

PTX002143

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages with Bates ending 1259- 1263,and 1268.

GRANTED.

PTX002914

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 6, 15, 16, 21 and 26.

GRANTED.

PTX002933

Yellow-highlighted portions on pageswith Bates ending 12572-12573.

GRANTED.

PTX003122

Yellow-highlighted portions on pageswith Bates ending 20043-20048, and 20050.

GRANTED.

PTX003250

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 007-009.

GRANTED.

PTX003251

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 008-010.

GRANTED.

PTX003320

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 002-003.

GRANTED.

PTX003429

Yellow-highlighted portions onpages 004-007, 011, and 013.

GRANTED.

PTX003569

Yellow-highlighted portions on pageswith Bates ending 698 and 701.

GRANTED.

PTX003616

Yellow-highlighted portions on pageswith Bates ending 0684-0688, and 0695.

GRANTED.

PTX003733

Seal in its entirety.

GRANTED.

PTX003735

Yellow-highlighted portions on pageswith Bates ending 1585, 1588-1595 and 1605.

GRANTED.

JTX116

Yellow-highlighted portions on pageswith Bates ending 7278, 7283,7285-87, 7291, 7332, and 7334.

GRANTED.

JTX126

Yellow-highlighted portions on pages010-016, 019-022, 031-032,040, 046, 054, 055, 056, and 071-078.

GRANTED.

JTX127

Yellow-highlighted portion on page 008.

GRANTED.

Huawei's Deposition Designations

DeponentName

DepositionDate

InformationSought to beSealedAccording toHuawei

Basis forObjection

Ding,Jianxin

3/12/2018

55:1, 60:16,112:6-11,122:8-25, 126:14-22,152:20-153:25

DENIED withrespect to55:1,60:16122:8-25126:14-22.GRANTED as to theremainder.

Ding,Jianxin

3/12/2018

100:16-101:7

DENIED.

Ding,Jianxin

3/13/2018

190:10-13,250:21-25,254:2-7

GRANTED.

Yu,Nanfen

3/14/2018

47:22-48:3

GRANTED.

Wang, LiQiang

3/15/2018

26:2-8, 35:8-20,59:19-23

DENIED.

Intel's Exhibit A

PDF page 7 AAPL-FTC-00100545-553 AAPL-FTC-00100753-65 AAPL-FTC-00132140-42

Exhibit

Bates RangeProvided by theParties

Information Sought to beSealed by Intel

Ruling

DTX00014

86601DOC015482-83

DENIED.

DTX00016

86601DOC034407-8

86601DOC034408 pages1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,86001DOC034409 pages2, 4, 6

DENIED.

DTX00056

AAPL-FTC-00100547- 49, 51-2

GRANTED.

DTX00057

AAPL-FTC- 00100757,59-60, 64

GRANTED.

DTX00085

AAPL-FTC-00132140-41

GRANTED.

DTX00635

INTEL-QCOM00002 2031

INTEL-QCOM000022060; 105

GRANTED.

DTX00646

INTEL-QCOM00021 4960

INTEL-QCOM000214967-980

GRANTED.

DTX00648

INTEL-QCOM00021 5595

INTEL-QCOM000215599- 613

GRANTED.

DTX00649

INTEL-QCOM00021 5821-25

INTEL-QC0M000215825

GRANTED.

DTX00654

INTEL-QCOM00035 4039-44

INTEL-QCOM000354040- 44

DENIED as overbroad.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.

DTX00656

INTEL-QCOM00048 7295-299

INTEL-QCOM000487295- 99

DENIED as overbroad.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.

BAIN00051010 AAPL-FTC-0035199-200 AAPL-FTC-00010253-56 APL-QC-FTC-34560911-31

DTX00674

INTEL-QCOM00223 6311-12

INTEL-QCOM002236313-317, 320-326

DENIED as overbroad.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.

DTX00675

INTEL-QCOM002458 604-70

INTEL- QCOM002458608-12; 14-16, 18-20, 22-23, 25-26, 29, 31-32, 36, 39-49,51-53, 56, 60-63, 65-68.

DENIED asoverbroad withrepsect to pages. 9,12,14, 23, 49.GRANTED withrespect to theremainder

DTX00681

INTEL-QCOM003057 387-481

INTEL- QCOM003057387,392-3, 395-396, 398-400, 402-414, 416-418, 421-429

GRANTED.

DTX00692

INTEL-QCOM004909 037

INTEL-QCOM004909039-74, 83-93, 95

GRANTED.

DTX00704

INTEL-QCOM007541 467-74

INTEL-QCOM007541467-74

DENIED as overbroad.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.

DTX01426

Slide nos. 3, 4, 8, 12, 17-19, 27, 292

DENIED.

DTX00689

INTEL-QCOM004269 911-13-999

INTEL-QCOM004269912, 14-18, 22-39, 41-53, 56-65,67-68, 69-73, 77-81, 83-85, 88-97, 99.

DENIED as overbroad.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.

PTX001422

AAPL-FTC-0035200

GRANTED.

PTX001457

AAPL-FTC-00010255-56

GRANTED.

PTX001496

APL-QC-FTC-34560912, 17-18, 21-23, 25

GRANTED.

PTX002095

INTEL-QCOM005886 053-84

INTEL-QCOM005886062, 84.

GRANTED.

AAPL-FTC-00128661-65 AAPL-FTC-00153047-9

PTX002135

AAPL-FTC-00108170-211

AAPL-FTC-00108182, 188,190, 192, 194, 195,208,

GRANTED.

PTX002189

AAPL-FTC-001286634- 64

GRANTED.

PTX002450

86600DOC096994-018

86600DOC097000

GRANTED.

PTX002552

86600DOC097253-68

86600DOC097258-60,62-64.

GRANTED.

PTX002575

86600DOC001657-86

86600DOC001661-63,66-68

GRANTED.

PTX002594

INTEL-QCOM008124 586-663

INTEL-QCOM008124587:Redactions on pages 10, 12,22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,31, 32, 33, 34

DENIED as overbroad withrespect to pages 11 and 23.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.GRANTED with respect tothe remainder.

PTX002621

INTEL-QCOM000420 594-607

INTEL- QCOM000420594:pages 1, 2; INTEL-QCOM000420596: pages2, 5, 6, 7, 9

GRANTED.

PTX002762

AAPL-FTC-00153047-9

GRANTED.

PTX002768

INTEL-QCOM008077 974-87

INTEL- QCOM008077976,979

GRANTED.

PTX002976

INTEL-QCOM000498642 -60

INTEL- QCOM000498644-652,656, 658

GRANTED.

PTX003027

INTEL-QCOM005100 52-99

INTEL-QCOM00510052, 55-57, 59, 61-69, 71-76,80, 82-84, 87, 89, 95-96,98-99

GRANTED.

PTX003458

INTEL-QCOM005712072 (native)

Withhold in full (native)

GRANTED.

PTX003732

INTEL-QCOM007951655-711

INTEL-QCOM007951655-711

GRANTED.

PTX003745

AAPL-FTC-00130920-27

AAPL-FTC-00130920-27

GRANTED.

PTX010861

INTEL-QCOM007541 467

INTEL-QCOM007541467-69, 71-74.

GRANTED.

PTX011130

INTEL- QC1065-2_008014960(native)

Withhold in full (native)

GRANTED.

PTX011131

INTEL-QC1065_00077703 (native)

INTEL-QC1065_00077703-05

GRANTED.

Intel's Appendix A Deposition Designations

DeponentName

DepositionDate

Information Sought to beSealed by Intel

Objection

Wolff

2/7/2018

124:2-124:4; 124:13-124:14-124:16-124:19

GRANTED.

Constantine

2/16/2018

3:15:6-17; 317:15-317:22,317:25-318:1, 318:3-319:3,320:3-6, 320:9-320:14

GRANTED.

Keddy

3/7/2018

113:1-113:4; 113:25-114:12;115:13-116:2

GRANTED.

Keddy

3/7/2018

123:14-124:8, 124:10-125:3;125:12-125:23, 127:7-127:22;129:5-129:11

GRANTED.

Eul

3/21/2018

187:5-187:15

DENIED.

InterDigital Appendix A

Exhibit

InformationSought to beSealed byInterDigital

Ruling

Exhibit 1 - DTX00266(APL-QC-FTC 15569990)

Correspondencein full

GRANTED.

Exhibit 2 - DTX00856(Pegatron_0001284829)

Agreement infull

GRANTED.

Exhibit 3 - DTX00861(Pegatron_1000000001)

Correspondenceand agreement infull

GRANTED.

Exhibit 4 - DTX01363(Wistron_1000000105)

Agreement infull

GRANTED.

Exhibit 5 - DTX01478(Wistron_1000000113)

Agreement infull

GRANTED.

Exhibit 6 - PTX003767(APL-QC_00451156)

Agreement infull

GRANTED.

Kyocera's Appendix A

Exhibit

Information Sought to Be SealedAccording to Kyocera

Ruling

PTX011074

Highly confidential businessinformation regarding licenses grantedby Kyocera and certain non-partiesand license payments and royalty ratesagreed to by Kyocera.

GRANTED.

Lenovo and Motorola's Appendix A


Exhibit

Info. Sought to be Sealed According to Lenovo andMotorola

Objection

DTX00713 /PTX002064

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewithunder seal as Exhibit A.

GRANTED.

DTX00736

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit B.

GRANTED.

DTX00890 /DTX10497

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted versionfiled herewith under seal as Exhibit C.

GRANTED.

DTX02788

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal asExhibit D.

GRANTED.

DTX10941

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewithunder seal as Exhibit E.

GRANTED.

DTX15716 /DTX15717

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted versionfiled herewith under seal as Exhibit F.

GRANTED.

PTX002027

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit G.

GRANTED.

PTX002412

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit H.

GRANTED.

PTX002520

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit I.

GRANTED.

PTX002540

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit J.

GRANTED.

PTX002546

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit K.

GRANTED.

PTX002570

Seal in its entirety (alternatively, at least redact pagesMOTO- QUAL- 01933600 to 01933608 asirrelevant to the current litigation and confidential). Anunredacted version filed herewith under seal as Exhibit L.

GRANTED.

PTX002596

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit M.

GRANTED.

PTX002597

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit N.

GRANTED.

PTX002598

Seal in its entirety. An unredacted version filed herewithunder seal as Exhibit O.

GRANTED.

PTX002645

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit P.

GRANTED.

PTX002775 /PTX002776

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit Q.

GRANTED.

PTX002875

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit R.

GRANTED.

PTX002876

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewithunder seal as Exhibit S.

GRANTED.

PTX002886

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit T.

GRANTED.

PTX002895

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit U.

GRANTED.

PTX002967

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewithunder seal as Exhibit V.

GRANTED.

PTX003083

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit W.

GRANTED.

PTX003110

Portions highlighted in pink in the unredacted version filedherewith under seal as Exhibit X.

GRANTED.

PTX003393

Portions highlighted in pink in theunredacted version filed herewith under seal as ExhibitY.

GRANTED.

DTX00341

Provisionally seal entire exhibituntil copy provided to Lenovo and Motorola

GRANTED.

DTX00381

Provisionally seal entire exhibit until copy provided toLenovo and Motorola

GRANTED.

DTX00395

Provisionally seal entire exhibit until copy provided toLenovo and Motorola

GRANTED.

DTX01207

Provisionally seal entire exhibit until copy provided toLenovo and Motorola

GRANTED.

DTX01415

Provisionally seal entire exhibit until copy provided toLenovo and Motorola

GRANTED.

LGE's Appendix A


Exhibit

Information Sought to be Sealed by LGE

Ruling

PTX003779

Full document

GRANTED.

PTX003759

Definitions of"Major Snapdragon Subscriber UnitModel" "Other Snapdragon Subscriber UnitModel" "Quarterly Indemnity Cap" and"Yearly Indemnity Cap," Sections 2.1,2.2.2, 3.1, 3.2, and select text fromSection 4.1

GRANTED.

March 30,2018 HagueConventionTestimonyof Hwi-JaeCho

¶¶ 238, 245, 247-48

GRANTED.

PTX002699

Full document

GRANTED.

PTX011259

Section 1, only "NetRevenues" and"QualifyingHandsets"definitions; Section2(a); and columnheading in ExhibitA

GRANTED.

PTX011254

Full document

GRANTED.

PTX011258

Full document

GRANTED.

MediaTek's Appendix A Exhibits

MTK_00296018(customer name)p. 3 (customer name); pp. 26-32 in full;pp. 8-9 (customer name) MTK_00523907- MTK_00523910(lasttwo columns); MTK_00523913 infull MTK_00184574(client name); MTK_00184576 (twobullet points and customer name);MTK_001 84577(customer name) MTK_00240759(paragraph 3); MTK_00240760(paragraphs 3-5 in topemail, last line on page);MTK_00240761 (Actions(1), (3)-(6)) MTK_00283679 (first three paragraphs onPage and last three paragraphs on page);MTK_00283680 (first 5 bullet points)

Exhibit

Information To Be Sealed By MediaTek

Basis for Objection

DTX00765

GRANTED.

DTX00769

pp. 14; 23

GRANTED.

DTX00770

DENIED with respect toPage 15. GRANTED withrespect to the remainder.

DTX00780

Sealed in full

DENIED as overbroad. TheCourt instructs the party toconfer and submit narrowerredactions.

PTX001787

GRANTED.

PTX002501

GRANTED.

PTX002904

GRANTED.

PTX003447

pp. 3-18 in full

GRANTED.

PTX003296

Customer names throughout;MTK_00335942(second bullet point)

GRANTED.

MediaTek's Appendix A Deposition Designations

DeponentName

DepositionDate

Information to beSealed byMediaTek

Ruling

Moynihan,John Finbarr

3/12/2018

68:17-21121:10-121:25122:2141:14-15141:17-21158:16-18158:21-159:5159:7-9163:3-7271:19-272:22275:25-276:5276:21-277:19323:17-23323:25-324:9

GRANTED.

Moynihan,John Finbarr

3/13/2018

427:13-17428:15-429:1429:13-21429:23430:2-7430:19-431:3431:10-11431:13-16431:18-20431:22432:5-8432:10-13432:15

GRANTED.

Nokia's Appendix A Exhibits

Exhibit

Information Sought to beSealed

Ruling

DTX01002

Excerpts from the Subscriber Unit LicenseAgreement between Qualcomm and Nokia,dated July 22, 2008 (highlighted in red)

GRANTED.

DTX546

Excerpts from the Patent License Agreementbetween Nokia Corp., Nokia Siemens B.V. andCompal Communications,executed on June 12, 2009 (highlighted in red)

GRANTED.

DTX1207

Excerpts from the Patent License Agreementbetween Nokia and Chi Mei, dated March 3,2009 (highlighted in red)

GRANTED.

PTX3357

Excerpts from various agreements betweenApple

GRANTED.

Nokia's Appendix A Deposition Designation

DeponentName

DepositionDate

InformationSought tobe Sealedby Nokia

Ruling

Teksler,Boris

4/20/2018

274:9-17

GRANTED.

Samsung's Appendix A Exhibits

Exhibit

Ruling

Internal Samsung negotiation reportDTX01475 at SFT-0036174-76

Granted.

2004 SULAAmendmentJTX117 at Q2017MDL3_000 17698-705

Granted.

2009 SULAAmendmentJTX119 at SFT- 0000113-199

Granted.

2018 SULA AmendmentDTX01463;PTX003795;DTX01462; andDTX01462; andQAPPCMSD02163037-068

Granted.

2018 Strategic Relationship Agmt.PTX003796; DTX01462; andPTX003471 atQAPPCMSD0216 3069-076

Granted.

2018 Settlement Agmt.DTX01038; PTX003798; DTX01462;and PTX003471 at QAPPCMSD02163083-097

Granted.

2018 PatentComponent Agmt. DTX01464;PTX003799; DTX01462; andPTX003471 atQAPPCMSD0216 3098-113

Granted.

2018 Tech. Collab. Agmt.DTX01039; DTX01462; andPTX003471 at

Granted.

QAPPCMSD0216 3114-133

Granted.

Samsung's Appendix A Deposition Designations

DeponentName

DepositionDate

Information Soughtto be Sealed bySamsung

Basis for Objection

Lee, Injung

3/14/18

58:22; 58:25(numeric values)

GRANTED.

Lee, Injung

3/14/18

59:1; 59:4 (numericvalues)

GRANTED.

Lee, Injung

3/14/18

106:5-7

GRANTED.

Lee, Injung

3/15/18

144:16-18, 25; 145:1-6, 11-18, 21-23

GRANTED.

Lee, Injung

3/15/18

255:19-256:12

DENIED.

Kim,Yooseok

3/21/18

29:23-30:12

GRANTED.

Kim,Yooseok

3/22/18

138:1-8

GRANTED.

Kang,Hojin(Alex)

2/28/18

89:20-90:19

DENIED.

Ahn, SeungHo

3/29/18

181:9-12

GRANTED.

Sony's Appendix A Exhibits

Exhibit

Information Sought to BeSealed by Sony

Basis for Objection

PTX001474

Q2017MDL1_00779810 -Q2017MDL1_00779814

GRANTED.

PTX001558

Q2014FTC01360358 -Q2014FTC01360362

GRANTED.

PTX001567

Q2014FTC01491780 -Q2014FTC01491788

GRANTED.

Sony's Non-Will Call Exhibits

Exhibit

Information Sought to BeSealed by Sony

Basis for Objection

DTX00882

Q2014FTC02577811 -Q2014FTC02577815

GRANTED.

DTX00964

Q2017MDL1_01206693 -Q2017MDL1_01206698

GRANTED.

DTX03027

Q2014FTC00384622 -Q2014FTC00384652

DENIED as overbroad. The Courtinstructs the party to confer andsubmit narrower redactions.

DTX03046

Q2014FTC00660708 -Q2014FTC00660770

DENIED as overbroad.The Court instructs theparty to confer and submitnarrower redactions.

DTX03048

Q2014FTC00702283 -Q2014FTC00702315

DENIED as overbroad. TheCourt instructs the party toconfer and submit narrowerredactions.

DTX03148

Q2014FTC02033652 -Q2014FTC02033664

GRANTED.

DTX03201

Q2014FTC02755825 -Q2014FTC02755829

DENIED.

JTX122

Q2017MDL1_03030090 -Q2017MDL1_03030121

DENIED as overbroad. TheCourt instructs the party toconfer and submit narrowerredactions.

JTX123

Q2017MDL1_03111128 -Q2017MDL1_03111135

DENIED as overbroad. TheCourt instructs the party toconfer and submit narrowerredactions.

JTX131

Q2017MDL1_03115389 -Q2017MDL1_03115523

DENIED as overbroad. TheCourt instructs the party toconfer and submit narrowerredactions.

PTX001269

Q2017MDL1_01206693 -Q2017MDL1_01206698

GRANTED.

PTX001272

Q2017MDL1_01206699 -Q2017MDL1_01206705

GRANTED.

PTX001287

QNDCAL03064520 -QNDCAL03064825

GRANTED.

PTX001290

Q2017MDL1_01855129 -Q2017MDL1_01855141

GRANTED.

PTX001303

Q2017MDL1_00269206 -Q2017MDL1_00269228

GRANTED.

PTX001517

Q2017MDL1_01445020 -Q2017MDL1_01445025

GRANTED.

PTX001527

Q2017MDL1 01199818 -Q2017MDL1_01199822

GRANTED.

PTX001528

QNDCAL03527861 -QNDCAL03527865

GRANTED.

PTX001543

Q2017MDL1_02279480 -Q2017MDL1_02279483

GRANTED.

PTX001545

Q2017MDL1_0260171-Q2017MDL1_02601716

GRANTED.

PTX001546

Q2017MDL1_00289060 -Q2017MDL1_00289063

GRANTED.

PTX001549

QNDCAL04488551 -QNDCAL04488558

GRANTED.

PTX003683

Q2017MDL1_02322296 -Q2017MDL1_02322338

GRANTED.

PTX003750

Q2017MDL1_03115336 -Q2017MDL1_03115388

GRANTED.

PTX011048

Q2017MDL1_01199710 -Q2017MDL1_01199715

GRANTED.

Sony's Appendix A Deposition Designations

Deponent Name

DepositionDate

InformationSought to BeSealed

Objection

Arthur Lee Hill, IV

5/15/2018

32:12-33:12

GRANTED.

Arthur Lee Hill, IV

5/15/2018

33:24-34:4

GRANTED.

Arthur Lee Hill, IV

5/15/2018

37:7-37:15

GRANTED.

Arthur Lee Hill, IV

5/15/2018

74:18-74:20

GRANTED.

ZTE's Appendix A Exhibits

ZTE50296-ZTE50306in full ZTE50942 in full

Exhibit

Information Sought toBe Sealed By ZTE

Basis for Objection

PTX002569

GRANTED.

PTX002666

GRANTED.

PTX2640

Q2014FTC04597436-Q2014FTC04597439(in full)

GRANTED.

ZTE's Appendix A Deposition Designations

DeponentName

DepositionDate

InformationSought toBe Sealed

Basis for Objection

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

34:2-34:9

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

228:24-229:2

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

230:20-231:9

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

283:12-283:14

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

283:20-284:2

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

285:12-285:13

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

285:15-285:20

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

316:22-317:1

GRANTED.

Blaylock,Richard

2/27/2018

317:6-317:16

GRANTED.


Summaries of

In re Qualcomm Litig.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 15, 2019
Case No.: 3:17-cv-0108-GPC-mdd (S.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2019)
Case details for

In re Qualcomm Litig.

Case Details

Full title:IN RE: QUALCOMM LITIGATION

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 15, 2019

Citations

Case No.: 3:17-cv-0108-GPC-mdd (S.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2019)