PARKERVISION, INC.
v.
QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

M.D. Fla. | 2025-04-24
No. 800.
2025 FFL 10890 District Court, M.D. Florida (2025) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The court granted ParkerVision's unopposed motion to seal supplemental evidentiary information related to an expert witness's cancer diagnosis in a patent infringement dispute. The court found good cause to seal the materials under local rules and the Eleventh Circuit's sealing standards, citing the privacy interest in personal medical information.

Holding

The court granted ParkerVision's unopposed motion to seal the supplemental evidentiary information, finding good cause under Local Rule 1.11 and the Eleventh Circuit's sealing standard. The privacy interest in personal medical information supports sealing.

Key Quotes

“The law recognizes a person's privacy interest in their personal medical information.”

Legal principle cited by the court to support the sealing of medical information related to the expert witness's cancer diagnosis
Facts & Procedural History

ParkerVision filed a motion to seal supplemental evidentiary information in support of its motion for reconsideration of a December 9, 2024 order. The…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Good Cause For Sealing

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Good Cause For Sealing cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Before the Court is ParkerVision's Unopposed Motion to Seal ParkerVision's Notice of New Sealed Supplemental Evidentiary Information in Support of Its Motion (Dkt. 755) for Reconsideration of the Court's December 9, 2024 Order (Dkt. 726) in Light of the Expert Witness's Cancer Diagnosis Pursuant to the Court's Order (Dkt. 799). Doc. No. 800. Defendants do not oppose. Id. at 6.

Based on the representations in the motion, having considered Local Rule 1.11 and the Eleventh Circuit's standard for sealing, and for reasons similar to those previously set forth in prior Orders, see Doc. Nos. 466, 771, 774, 789, the Court finds good cause to allow ParkerVision to file the supplement and related exhibits under seal. See Clark v. FDS Bank, No. 6:17-cv-692-Orl-41TBS, 2018 WL 6503583, at *2

(M.D. Fla. Dec. 11, 2018) (“The law recognizes a person's privacy interest in their personal medical information.").

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. ParkerVision's Unopposed Motion to Seal ParkerVision's Notice of New Sealed Supplemental Evidentiary Information in Support of Its Motion (Dkt. 755) for Reconsideration of the Court's December 9, 2024 Order (Dkt. 726) in Light of the Expert Witness's Cancer Diagnosis Pursuant to the Court's Order (Dkt. 799) (Doc. No. 800) is GRANTED.

2. On or before April 29, 2025, ParkerVision shall separately file the documents described in the motion under seal. See Doc. No. 799.

3. Upon review, the Court may require that some or all of the information filed under seal be filed in the public record, if it determines that the information is not properly subject to sealing. Otherwise, this seal shall not extend beyond ninety (90) days after the case is closed and all appeals exhausted. See Local Rule 1.11(e).

DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on April 24, 2025.

Uslis Horan Price

LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copies furnished to:

76186

Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • ParkerVision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc. (M.D. Fla. 2025)
    …asons similar to those previously set forth in prior Orders, see Doc. Nos. 466, 771, 774, 789, the Court finds good cause to allow ParkerVision to file the supplement and related exhibits under seal. See Clark v. FDS Bank, No. 6:17-cv-692-Orl-41TBS, 2018 WL 6503583, at *2 ---PAGE 2--- Case 6:14-cv-00687-PGB-LHP Document 801 Filed 04/24/25 Page 2 of 3 PageID 76185 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 11, 2018) (“The law recognizes a person's privacy interest in their personal medical information."). Accordingly, it is ORDERED as…
  • Doe K.R. v. Choice Hotels, 2014 WL 12622459 (M.D. Fla. 2025)
    …f's deposition transcript and excerpts of Dr. Katy Fowler Sutton's deposition transcript. The Court will accept the redacted version of the Daubert motion on the public docket. See Doc. No. 139. See also Clark v. FDS Bank, No. 6:17-cv-692-Orl-41TBS, 2018 WL 6503583, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 11, 2018) ("The law recognizes a person's privacy interest in their personal medical information."); cf. McKenzie v. United States Tennis Ass'n Inc., No. 6:22-cv-615-PGB-LHP, 2023 WL -4- ---PAGE 5--- 6626109, at *2 (M.D. Fla.…
  • Doe K.R. v. Choice Hotels (M.D. Fla. 2025)
    …n and redaction would make the document unreadable. Id. at 7. Upon review, and based on WHG's explanation, the Court finds good cause to permit Dr. Katy Fowler Sutton's report to be filed under seal. See Clark v. FDS Bank, No. 6:17-cv-692-Orl-41TBS, 2018 WL 6503583, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 11, 2018) (“The law recognizes a person's privacy interest in their personal medical information."). Regarding Plaintiff's alleged trafficker's arrest warrant, WHG says that this arrest warrant is sealed on the criminal docke…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw