This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
This is part of a series of articles discussing recent orders of interest issued in patent cases by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
Where a U.S. magistrate judge ordered that the deposition testimony of a former assistant United States attorney should remain under seal, that was clearly erroneous because (1) the deposition transcript does not appear to qualify as a personnel “record” of the former AUSA within the meaning of the Privacy Act and (2) there is no