On February 26, 2009, the parties requested the Court to enter a Stipulated Protective Order that would prevent disclosure of trade secrets and other sensitive materials (such as software code) to parties and persons not specifically described in the Order. This Stipulation would extend even to deposition testimony and summaries of protected information that are filed with Court. Any such material filed with the Court shall either be filed under seal (i.e., for the Court's review only) or redacted if possible. Protected information, however, shall be allowed at trial for the prosecution and defense of the matter. Specific procedures and guidelines to be followed to ensure that protected materials are properly identified are laid out in great detail.
Now, before anyone fires the sensationalism gun, this is typical in intellectual property cases. It would be shocking if such a Stipulation were not entered into which is beneficial to both parties. This request was not made unilaterally by Apple, but was joined by Psystar who also has information it wishes to protect.
Of further note, the ten John Does have re-appeared in the case caption. There is no particular significance to that other than pointing out that their omission in prior filing captions was sloppy work on both sides. The caption now is a bit more complex since the entry of Psystar Amended Counterclaims as the case is now basically two suits in one. This is how the caption now appears.
APPLE INC., a California Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
PSYSTAR CORPORATION a Florida
corporation, and DOES 1-10, inclusive,
Defendants.
___________________________________
PSYSTAR CORPORATION a Florida
corporation,
Counterclaimant,
v.
APPLE INC., a California Corporation,
Counterdefendant,
I would expect that the Court will approve this routine request.