Finjan LLC v. Sonicwall, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 22, 20205:17-cv-04467California474 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 FINJAN, INC., Case No. 17-cv-04467-BLF (VKD)

9 Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING

10 v. ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE

UNDER SEAL

11 SONICWALL, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 249 Defendant. 12

13 14 In connection with a discovery dispute concerning defendant SonicWall, Inc.’s requests to 15 obtain documents from another action that plaintiff Finjan, Inc. contends are protected under the 16 attorney-client privilege and attorney work product doctrine (Dkt. No. 248), SonicWall filed an 17 administrative motion to file portions of the parties’ joint discovery dispute letter and an 18 associated exhibit under seal. Dkt. No. 249. Having considered the parties’ submissions, the 19 Court grants the administrative motion, as set forth below. 20 There is a strong presumption in favor of access by the public to judicial records and 21 documents accompanying dispositive motions that can be overcome only by a showing of 22 “compelling reasons…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.