Although the court is more than a little skeptical of Samsung’s arguments regarding the financial terms, Rule 26 supplies a broad standard of relevance. Many third parties to this case have had their licensing agreements disclosed – without any redaction of financial terms – subject to an Attorneys-Eyes-Only designation because the confidential financial terms were clearly relevant to the dispute between Apple and Samsung. HTC is not entitled to special treatment, especially when it has recognized the general sufficiency of the protective order and the integrity of Samsung’s outside counsel.
Accordingly, Samsung’s motion to compel production of an unredacted version of the settlement agreement is GRANTED. Apple shall produce the unredacted document without delay subject to an Attorneys-Eyes-Only designation under the protective order already in place in this case.
You can see the full order at the link below...
Read More [via AppleInsider]