In its Decision, the Board granted Medtronic’s motion to seal certain papers. Specifically, Medtronic moved to permanently seal three documents that were filed under seal: (1) Medtronic’s response to Bosch’s request for production and interrogatory; (2) certain portions of the Declaration of Peter Shimabukuro; and (3) a portion of its Opposition to the Motion to Terminate. Medtronic argued that these papers contain confidential details concerning Medtronic’s acquisition of Cardiocom. Bosch did not oppose or join Medtronic’s motion, taking no position.
As the Board explained:
The standard for granting a motion to seal is “for good cause.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.54(a). Medtronic, as movant, bears the burden of proof in showing entitlement to the requested relief, and must explain why the information sought to be sealed constitutes confidential information. See 35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(7); 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(c); Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,760 (Aug. 14, 2012). Upon reviewing the materials sought to be sealed, and Medtronic’s arguments regarding their confidential nature, we are persuaded that good cause exists to seal them. We also note that the redacted portions of the materials appear to be tailored narrowly to only confidential information. As the parties previously agreed to the Board’s Default Protective Order, and provided a copy of the same, the materials will be sealed pursuant to that order.
The Board thus ordered certain documents to remain under seal and a redacted copy of one document to be filed as a new exhibit.
Medtronic, Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems, Inc., IPR2014-00488; IPR2014-00607
Paper 60: Decision Granting Motions to Seal Papers and Exhibits
Dated: May 22, 2015
Patents: 7,769,605 B2; 7,870,249 B2
Before: Miriam L. Quinn, Stephen C. Siu, and Justin T. Arbes
Written by: Arbes