[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$apiParty6fBuHLCPZ1LTYs42XHdVbjpSDOYYPYzyxeAGwSN5Tp8":3,"$apiPartyUTDImNCxhMYi9WKwd7d_HnHizQD9U8QVN5mm0dyJwp4":563,"$apiPartyUTDImNCxhMYi9WKwd7d_HnHizQD9U8QVN5mm0dyJwp4$H93EERW16b":563},{"product_data":4,"scene_data":21,"task_data":407,"modality_data":441,"domain_data":478},[5,9,12,15,18],{"name":6,"value":7,"add_value":8,"describe":8},"Rivo","1","",{"name":10,"value":11,"add_value":8,"describe":8},"Cubo","2",{"name":13,"value":14,"add_value":8,"describe":8},"Moye","3",{"name":16,"value":17,"add_value":8,"describe":8},"Juro","4",{"name":19,"value":20,"add_value":8,"describe":8},"Ordo","5",[22,73,135,197,232,267,302,337,372],{"name":23,"value":7,"add_value":24,"describe":25,"children":26},"Home & Indoor","sofa","AI enhances everyday home life. Our datasets cover real indoor scenes to support smart devices, robotics, and home intelligence.",[27,29,31,33,35,37,40,43,46,49,52,55,58,61,64,67,70],{"name":28,"value":7},"Living Room",{"name":30,"value":11},"Bedroom",{"name":32,"value":14},"Kitchen",{"name":34,"value":17},"Dining Area",{"name":36,"value":20},"Bathroom",{"name":38,"value":39},"Entrance \u002F Foyer","6",{"name":41,"value":42},"Corridor \u002F Hallway","7",{"name":44,"value":45},"Staircase","8",{"name":47,"value":48},"Home Office","9",{"name":50,"value":51},"Hobby \u002F Game Room","10",{"name":53,"value":54},"Worship Space","11",{"name":56,"value":57},"Garage","12",{"name":59,"value":60},"Utility \u002F Laundry Room","13",{"name":62,"value":63},"Pantry","14",{"name":65,"value":66},"Basement","15",{"name":68,"value":69},"Garden","16",{"name":71,"value":72},"Balcony","17",{"name":74,"value":11,"add_value":75,"describe":76,"children":77},"Office & Educational","workshop","AI is reshaping work and learning. Our datasets capture offices and classrooms to power automation and next-generation productivity tools.",[78,81,84,87,90,93,96,99,102,105,108,111,114,117,120,123,126,129,132],{"name":79,"value":80},"Open Office","18",{"name":82,"value":83},"Private Office","19",{"name":85,"value":86},"Co-working Space","20",{"name":88,"value":89},"Reception \u002F Lobby","21",{"name":91,"value":92},"Conference Room","22",{"name":94,"value":95},"Huddle Room \u002F Booth","23",{"name":97,"value":98},"Lecture Hall \u002F Auditorium","24",{"name":100,"value":101},"Classroom","25",{"name":103,"value":104},"Science Laboratory","26",{"name":106,"value":107},"Library","27",{"name":109,"value":110},"Design Studio","28",{"name":112,"value":113},"Pantry \u002F Breakroom","29",{"name":115,"value":116},"Cafeteria \u002F Canteen","30",{"name":118,"value":119},"Restroom (Commercial)","31",{"name":121,"value":122},"Gymnasium \u002F Sports Hall","32",{"name":124,"value":125},"Server Room","33",{"name":127,"value":128},"Mailroom \u002F Logistics","34",{"name":130,"value":131},"Janitorial Closet","35",{"name":133,"value":134},"Corridor \u002F Elevators","36",{"name":136,"value":14,"add_value":137,"describe":138,"children":139},"Healthcare & Medical","love-and-help","AI is advancing modern healthcare. Our datasets include clinics and hospitals to enable clinical insights and medical automation.",[140,143,146,149,152,155,158,161,164,167,170,173,176,179,182,185,188,191,194],{"name":141,"value":142},"Operating Theatre \u002F OR","37",{"name":144,"value":145},"Consultation Room","38",{"name":147,"value":148},"Treatment Room","39",{"name":150,"value":151},"Dental Clinic","40",{"name":153,"value":154},"Inpatient Ward","41",{"name":156,"value":157},"Nurse Station","42",{"name":159,"value":160},"ICU","43",{"name":162,"value":163},"NICU (Neonatal ICU)","44",{"name":165,"value":166},"Emergency Room (ER)","45",{"name":168,"value":169},"Hospital Corridor","46",{"name":171,"value":172},"Waiting Area","47",{"name":174,"value":175},"CT\u002FMRI","48",{"name":177,"value":178},"Medical Laboratory","49",{"name":180,"value":181},"Phlebotomy Room","50",{"name":183,"value":184},"Rehabilitation Gym","51",{"name":186,"value":187},"Assisted Living Room","52",{"name":189,"value":190},"Pharmacy","53",{"name":192,"value":193},"Sterile Processing Dept","54",{"name":195,"value":196},"Medical Storage","55",{"name":198,"value":17,"add_value":199,"describe":200,"children":201},"Business & Public Service","business","AI is elevating commercial and public services. Our datasets span retail, dining, and service centers to improve intelligent operations.",[202,205,208,211,214,217,220,223,226,229],{"name":203,"value":204},"Shopping Mall Atrium","86",{"name":206,"value":207},"Supermarket Shelf","87",{"name":209,"value":210},"Self-Checkout Counter","88",{"name":212,"value":213},"Restaurant Dining Hall","89",{"name":215,"value":216},"Commercial Kitchen","90",{"name":218,"value":219},"Hotel Lobby","91",{"name":221,"value":222},"Subway Platform","92",{"name":224,"value":225},"Security Checkpoint","93",{"name":227,"value":228},"Underground Parking","94",{"name":230,"value":231},"Bank Teller Zone","95",{"name":233,"value":20,"add_value":234,"describe":235,"children":236},"Industrial & Manufacturing","robot-arm","AI is modernizing industry. Our datasets capture factories and logistics spaces to support robotics and intelligent manufacturing.",[237,240,243,246,249,252,255,258,261,264],{"name":238,"value":239},"Final Assembly Line","96",{"name":241,"value":242},"Quality Control Station","97",{"name":244,"value":245},"Robotic Welding Cell","98",{"name":247,"value":248},"CNC Machining Center","99",{"name":250,"value":251},"Cleanroom","100",{"name":253,"value":254},"Automated Warehouse","101",{"name":256,"value":257},"Loading Dock","102",{"name":259,"value":260},"Sorting Center","103",{"name":262,"value":263},"Chemical Plant","104",{"name":265,"value":266},"Power Substation","105",{"name":268,"value":39,"add_value":269,"describe":270,"children":271},"Transportation & Driving","car","AI is revolutionizing mobility. Our datasets capture road networks, vehicle dynamics and traffic scenarios to support autonomous driving and intelligent transportation systems.",[272,275,278,281,284,287,290,293,296,299],{"name":273,"value":274},"Urban Intersection","56",{"name":276,"value":277},"Highway \u002F Expressway","57",{"name":279,"value":280},"Tunnel","58",{"name":282,"value":283},"Roundabout","59",{"name":285,"value":286},"School \u002F Hospital Zone","60",{"name":288,"value":289},"Toll Station","61",{"name":291,"value":292},"Construction Zone","62",{"name":294,"value":295},"Parking Garage","63",{"name":297,"value":298},"Driver Cabin","64",{"name":300,"value":301},"Adverse Weather","65",{"name":303,"value":42,"add_value":304,"describe":305,"children":306},"Outdoor & Construction","tent-tree","AI is optimizing outdoor operations. Our datasets capture construction sites, open-air work zones and outdoor infrastructure to support smart construction and autonomous outdoor machinery.",[307,310,313,316,319,322,325,328,331,334],{"name":308,"value":309},"Excavation Site","66",{"name":311,"value":312},"Scaffolding Area","67",{"name":314,"value":315},"Material Storage Yard","68",{"name":317,"value":318},"Site Entrance","69",{"name":320,"value":321},"Roadwork Zone","70",{"name":323,"value":324},"Bridge Infrastructure","71",{"name":326,"value":327},"Transmission Line","72",{"name":329,"value":330},"Open-pit Mine","73",{"name":332,"value":333},"Tunneling Site","74",{"name":335,"value":336},"Post-Disaster Rubble","75",{"name":338,"value":45,"add_value":339,"describe":340,"children":341},"Nature, Aerial & Aquatic","global-loop","AI is exploring the natural world. Our datasets capture terrestrial landscapes, aerial vistas and aquatic ecosystems to support environmental monitoring and autonomous exploration systems.",[342,345,348,351,354,357,360,363,366,369],{"name":343,"value":344},"Deep Forest","76",{"name":346,"value":347},"Farmland \u002F Crops","77",{"name":349,"value":350},"River \u002F Lake","78",{"name":352,"value":353},"Open Ocean","79",{"name":355,"value":356},"Underwater Coral Reef","80",{"name":358,"value":359},"Fish Farm","81",{"name":361,"value":362},"Mountain Terrain","82",{"name":364,"value":365},"Urban Low Altitude","83",{"name":367,"value":368},"Fire Scene","84",{"name":370,"value":371},"Desert \u002F Gobi","85",{"name":373,"value":48,"add_value":374,"describe":375,"children":376},"Virtul & Digital","siri","AI is reshaping the virtual realm. Our datasets capture digital twins, virtual environments and simulated spaces to support metaverse development and intelligent digital interaction.",[377,380,383,386,389,392,395,398,401,404],{"name":378,"value":379},"VR Social Space","106",{"name":381,"value":382},"Synthetic Driving Sim","107",{"name":384,"value":385},"Digital Twin City","108",{"name":387,"value":388},"FPS \u002F MOBA Game","109",{"name":390,"value":391},"Robotics Gym","110",{"name":393,"value":394},"AR Navigation","111",{"name":396,"value":397},"Virtual Showroom","112",{"name":399,"value":400},"Code \u002F IDE Interface","113",{"name":402,"value":403},"App GUI Screen","114",{"name":405,"value":406},"Synthetic Face\u002FID","115",[408,411,414,417,420,423,426,429,432,435,438],{"name":409,"value":7,"add_value":410,"describe":8},"Classification","rubric",{"name":412,"value":11,"add_value":413,"describe":8},"Detection","radar",{"name":415,"value":14,"add_value":416,"describe":8},"Segmentation","segmentation",{"name":418,"value":17,"add_value":419,"describe":8},"Tacking","crosshairs",{"name":421,"value":20,"add_value":422,"describe":8},"Estimation","streamline",{"name":424,"value":39,"add_value":425,"describe":8},"QA","qa",{"name":427,"value":42,"add_value":428,"describe":8},"Recognition","finger-scan",{"name":430,"value":45,"add_value":431,"describe":8},"Control","control",{"name":433,"value":48,"add_value":434,"describe":8},"Extraction","extraction",{"name":436,"value":51,"add_value":437,"describe":8},"Retrieval","retrieval",{"name":439,"value":54,"add_value":440,"describe":8},"Forecast","forecast",[442,445,448,451,454,457,460,463,466,469,472,475],{"name":443,"value":7,"add_value":444,"describe":8},"Audio","audio",{"name":446,"value":11,"add_value":447,"describe":8},"Image","image",{"name":449,"value":14,"add_value":450,"describe":8},"Text","text",{"name":452,"value":17,"add_value":453,"describe":8},"Video","video",{"name":455,"value":20,"add_value":456,"describe":8},"Multi","multi",{"name":458,"value":39,"add_value":459,"describe":8},"Document","document",{"name":461,"value":42,"add_value":462,"describe":8},"Time-Series","time-series",{"name":464,"value":45,"add_value":465,"describe":8},"3D cloud","cloud",{"name":467,"value":48,"add_value":468,"describe":8},"Code","code",{"name":470,"value":51,"add_value":471,"describe":8},"Event","event",{"name":473,"value":54,"add_value":474,"describe":8},"Motion","motion",{"name":476,"value":57,"add_value":477,"describe":8},"Interaction","interaction",[479,482,487,491,494,499,504,509,514,519,524,528,532,536,540,544,548,552,556,559],{"id":480,"value":480,"name":233,"intro":481,"add_value":234,"describe":481},2,"智能质检：利用图像识别、多模态模型对产品外观或声音、振动等数据进行分析，自动识别缺陷，提高质量控制效率。\n工业知识问答与文档理解：通过大模型理解和总结技术文档、操作手册，实现快速问答、知识检索和培训支持。\n安全监测与风险预警：实时分析视频、传感器和操作日志，识别潜在危险行为或异常状态，提前预警，保障人员和设备安全。",{"id":483,"value":483,"name":484,"intro":485,"add_value":486,"describe":485},3,"Finance & Insurance","风险评估与预测：分析大量客户数据，评估信用风险、市场风险等，预测违约概率、股价走势等，辅助金融机构决策。\n智能投顾：根据客户风险偏好、资产状况等，提供个性化投资组合建议，实时调整投资策略。\n反欺诈检测：通过分析交易数据、用户行为，识别异常交易和欺诈行为，保障金融安全。","funds",{"id":488,"value":488,"name":489,"intro":490,"add_value":269,"describe":490},1,"Transport & Automotive","智能座舱：打造多模态交互的 AI 座舱，通过语音、手势、面部识别等实现人机交互，如语音控制导航、音乐播放。\n驾驶员状态监测：识别疲劳、分心、抽烟、打电话等行为，通过大模型判断危险等级，触发相应提醒或干预机制。\n智能驾驶：AI 用于环境感知、路径规划与决策控制，使车辆能识别道路、行人、障碍物等，实现自适应巡航、自动泊车、车道保持等功能，提升驾驶安全性与便利性。",{"id":492,"value":492,"name":136,"intro":493,"add_value":137,"describe":493},4,"医学影像诊断：分析 CT、MRI 等影像，辅助医生检测疾病、识别病灶，如 AI 系统可快速发现肺部结节。\n医患对话助手：通过自然语言处理理解患者问题，提供初步健康建议或就诊指导，缓解医生接诊压力。\n智能健康管理：根据用户健康数据，提供个性化健康建议、疾病预警，如智能手环结合 AI 分析用户运动、睡眠、心率等数据。",{"id":495,"value":495,"name":496,"intro":497,"add_value":498,"describe":497},6,"Smart Devices","多模态交互：支持语音、手势、眼神等多种交互方式，如 AI 眼镜可通过语音指令实现翻译、搜索功能。\n智能感知与处理：使设备能感知环境、理解用户需求，如智能音箱根据环境噪音自动调节音量。\n个性化服务：根据用户使用习惯和偏好，提供个性化功能与服务，如智能手表为用户定制运动健身计划。","microscope",{"id":500,"value":500,"name":501,"intro":502,"add_value":503,"describe":502},8,"Law & Government","智能法律问答：面向公众或企业用户，提供合规、劳动法、婚姻继承、知识产权等常见法律问题的智能解答。\n合同审查与风险识别：利用大模型分析合同内容，识别潜在风险条款、漏洞或不合理约定，提升合同审核质量。\n法律知识图谱构建：自动梳理法规、案例、条文之间的引用关系，构建语义化知识图谱，支持智能分析和推理。","hammer",{"id":505,"value":505,"name":506,"intro":507,"add_value":508,"describe":507},7,"Education & Training","个性化学习：根据学生学习进度、能力和知识掌握情况，推送个性化学习内容与练习，如智能辅导系统为学生制定专属学习计划。\n智能教学辅助：AI 助教协助教师进行作业批改、答疑解惑，还可分析教学数据，为教师提供教学反馈，优化教学方法。\n虚拟学习环境：利用 AI 创建虚拟实验、历史场景等，让学生沉浸式学习，如在虚拟化学实验室中进行实验操作。","degree-hat",{"id":510,"value":510,"name":511,"intro":512,"add_value":513,"describe":512},5,"Agriculture & Food","作物病虫害识别与防治：通过图像识别分析农作物叶片、果实等症状，识别病虫害类型，给出防治建议，减少产量损失。\n农产品质量检测：利用图像和传感器数据，识别果蔬等农产品的成熟度、外观缺陷，进行自动分级，提高市场竞争力。\n农情监测与预测：利用卫星遥感、气象和传感器数据，结合大模型预测作物长势、干旱、洪涝等农情变化。","ph-farm",{"id":515,"value":515,"name":516,"intro":517,"add_value":518,"describe":517},9,"Retail & E-commerce","智能客服：通过自然语言对话理解用户需求，提供产品推荐、订单查询、退换货支持等服务，提升客户满意度。\n个性化营销推荐：基于用户浏览、购买、偏好等行为数据，生成个性化推荐内容与优惠策略，提高转化率和客单价。\n商品内容生成：自动撰写商品标题、卖点描述、使用说明等内容，适用于海量SKU的内容生产与多语言发布。","buy",{"id":520,"value":520,"name":521,"intro":522,"add_value":523,"describe":8},10,"Security & Protection",null,"safe-shield-line",{"id":525,"value":525,"name":526,"intro":522,"add_value":527,"describe":8},11,"Environment & Climate","weather",{"id":529,"value":529,"name":530,"intro":522,"add_value":531,"describe":8},12,"Energy & Resource","energy-leaf",{"id":533,"value":533,"name":534,"intro":522,"add_value":535,"describe":8},13,"Express & Logistics","speed-outline",{"id":537,"value":537,"name":538,"intro":522,"add_value":539,"describe":8},15,"Sports","baseball-outline",{"id":541,"value":541,"name":542,"intro":522,"add_value":543,"describe":8},16,"General Data","daily-booth",{"id":545,"value":545,"name":546,"intro":522,"add_value":547,"describe":8},17,"Content & Media","media",{"id":549,"value":549,"name":550,"intro":522,"add_value":551,"describe":8},18,"Construction","construction",{"id":553,"value":553,"name":554,"intro":522,"add_value":555,"describe":8},19,"IT & Telecom","tech",{"id":557,"value":557,"name":558,"intro":522,"add_value":498,"describe":8},20,"Science & Research",{"id":560,"value":560,"name":561,"intro":522,"add_value":562,"describe":8},21,"Language & Culture","lang",{"id":564,"unique_code":565,"title":566,"icon":8,"intro":567,"cate":483,"detail":568,"create_time":569,"update_time":570,"price":571,"view_count":572,"download_count":573,"unit":573,"amount":574,"is_create_order":573,"enterprise_id":488,"seo_keywords":575,"seo_description":576,"data_format":577,"file_size":578,"apply_scene":579,"training_task":580,"version":581,"dataset_type_id":492,"dataset_scene_id":500,"sample_file":582,"banner":8,"unit_name":8,"cate_name":449,"icon_url":8,"banner_url":8,"sample_file_url":8,"data_dict":583,"qa_list":681,"sample_metadatas":698,"text_sample_content":769,"enterprise_name":770,"enterprise_logo":771,"data_distribution":772},1246,"e1639ad5d6c2fdd9627023b825d74eba","Commercial Litigation Confidentiality and Privilege Document Understanding Evaluation Dataset","Evaluate how well models understand commercial litigation documents, from confidentiality and privilege claims to court rulings.","\u003Cp>This dataset focuses on protective orders, privilege logs, sealing motions, confidentiality designation challenges, and related court rulings in commercial litigation. It captures key elements such as protected information categories, grounds for protection, disclosure restrictions, dispute scope, and case outcomes through source documents and structured semantic annotations. It supports evaluation of legal document understanding, model validation for domain-specific applications, and the development of legal information extraction workflows.\u003C\u002Fp>","2026-10-15 18:06:36","2026-10-19 17:19:11","0.00",14,0,5000,"commercial litigation dataset,legal document understanding,protective order analysis,privilege log classification,sealing motion evaluation,legal AI dataset,litigation document extraction,court ruling analysis","Evaluate understanding of confidentiality and privilege documents in commercial litigation, including protection grounds, disclosure limits, disputes, and court","JSON","0.4GB","commercial litigation document review, confidentiality and privilege analysis, court ruling interpretation","legal document understanding, claim identification, ruling interpretation","V1.0","rivo\u002Fsample-packages\u002Fa904d870-1b2b-4db9-9448-1edd6da9ee71\u002F20261015.zip",[584,589,595,600,605,610,615,620,625,630,635,640,645,650,655,660,665,670,675],{"id":573,"name":585,"field":586,"intro":587,"type":588},"File Name","file_name","File name","string",{"id":590,"name":591,"field":592,"intro":593,"type":594},9107,"Scope of Dispute","dispute_scope","The scope of disputes between the parties concerning confidentiality, privilege, document categories, specific pages, or particular information.","array",{"id":596,"name":597,"field":598,"intro":599,"type":588},9108,"Document Type","document_type","The type of document, such as a protective order, privilege log, sealing motion, confidentiality designation challenge, or court ruling.",{"id":601,"name":602,"field":603,"intro":604,"type":594},9109,"Grounds for Protection","protection_bases","Legal, factual, or commercial grounds asserted for restricting disclosure, sealing materials, or withholding them from filing.",{"id":606,"name":607,"field":608,"intro":609,"type":594},9110,"Relevant Parties and Roles","parties_and_roles","Parties, counsel, third parties, and document providers mentioned in the document, along with their roles in the confidentiality or privilege dispute.",{"id":611,"name":612,"field":613,"intro":614,"type":588},9111,"Disclosure Outcome","disclosure_outcome","The final disclosure status reflected in the document, such as nondisclosure, limited disclosure, delayed disclosure, public filing, or further review pending.",{"id":616,"name":617,"field":618,"intro":619,"type":594},9112,"Asserted Privilege Types","asserted_privileges","Evidentiary privileges or related protections asserted in the document.",{"id":621,"name":622,"field":623,"intro":624,"type":594},9113,"Key Supporting Spans","key_supporting_spans","Key sentences, passages, or quotations from the source text that support the semantic annotations.",{"id":626,"name":627,"field":628,"intro":629,"type":588},9114,"Source Document Text","source_document_text","Original text or searchable text representation of a protective order, privilege log, sealing motion, confidentiality designation challenge, or related ruling.",{"id":631,"name":632,"field":633,"intro":634,"type":588},9115,"Court Treatment and Outcome","court_treatment_result","The court's or adjudicating body's disposition of a confidentiality, privilege, sealing, or disclosure request, such as granting, denying, or partially granting it, requiring further explanation, or ordering resubmission.",{"id":636,"name":637,"field":638,"intro":639,"type":588},9116,"Case Procedural Context","case_procedural_context","A summary of the litigation stage and the procedural background giving rise to the relevant motion or dispute.",{"id":641,"name":642,"field":643,"intro":644,"type":588},9117,"Summary of Court Reasoning","court_reasoning_summary","A summary of the main reasons for finding protection applicable or inapplicable, limiting disclosure, or making a procedural decision.",{"id":646,"name":647,"field":648,"intro":649,"type":594},9118,"Disclosure Restrictions","disclosure_restrictions","Restrictions at issue or imposed on disclosure recipients, methods, permitted uses, or access conditions.",{"id":651,"name":652,"field":653,"intro":654,"type":588},9119,"Subject Matter of Materials","material_subject_matter","A summary of the commercial or litigation topics addressed by materials, information, or evidence claimed to be confidential or privileged.",{"id":656,"name":657,"field":658,"intro":659,"type":594},9120,"Sealing or Redaction Scope","sealing_or_redaction_scope","The specific materials covered by a sealing or redaction request or order, including materials to be redacted, obscured, or left public.",{"id":661,"name":662,"field":663,"intro":664,"type":594},9121,"Confidentiality Designations","confidentiality_designations","Confidentiality levels, labels, or party-applied designations appearing in the document.",{"id":666,"name":667,"field":668,"intro":669,"type":594},9122,"Conditions and Follow-up Actions","conditions_or_follow_up_actions","Additional measures or follow-up actions required by the court to maintain protection, permit disclosure, or advance the proceedings.",{"id":671,"name":672,"field":673,"intro":674,"type":594},9123,"Protected Information Categories","protected_information_categories","Categories of information claimed or determined to be protected by confidentiality or privilege.",{"id":676,"name":677,"field":678,"intro":679,"type":680},9124,"Whether Protection Was Upheld","privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld","Whether the relevant confidentiality or privilege claim was ultimately upheld by the court or reflected as supported in the document.","boolean",[682,686,690,694],{"id":683,"question":684,"answer":685},6435,"What types of documents does the dataset cover?","It focuses on protective orders, privilege logs, sealing motions, confidentiality designation challenges, and related court rulings in commercial litigation. Structured fields describe document types, procedural context, protection claims, and outcomes.",{"id":687,"question":688,"answer":689},6436,"Which evaluation tasks does the dataset support?","It can support legal document understanding, extraction of confidentiality and privilege information, dispute scope identification, disclosure restriction analysis, and classification of court outcomes. Confirm the available tasks against the samples and annotation coverage in the specific release.",{"id":691,"question":692,"answer":693},6437,"Does the dataset provide traceable evidence from source documents?","The schema includes source document text and key supporting spans, allowing annotations to be checked against relevant text. The available text formats and field completeness may vary by release.",{"id":695,"question":696,"answer":697},6438,"How can I access the dataset, and is commercial use permitted?","Access methods, license scope, and commercial use permissions are governed by the dataset's release page and applicable license agreement. Legal documents may be subject to confidentiality, privacy, or other restrictions, so verify authorization and comply with applicable requirements before use.",[699,725,748],{"id":700,"relate_table":701,"relate_id":702,"file_size":573,"file_name":703,"path":8,"duration":573,"cate":483,"file_format":704,"audio_rate":8,"audio_channel":522,"audio_bit_depth":522,"quality":8,"annotation":705,"cate_name":706,"dispute_scope":707,"document_type":708,"protection_bases":709,"parties_and_roles":710,"disclosure_outcome":711,"asserted_privileges":712,"key_supporting_spans":713,"source_document_text":714,"court_treatment_result":715,"case_procedural_context":716,"court_reasoning_summary":717,"disclosure_restrictions":718,"material_subject_matter":719,"sealing_or_redaction_scope":720,"confidentiality_designations":721,"conditions_or_follow_up_actions":722,"protected_information_categories":723,"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld":724},15138,"union_cubo",169371095,"样例_3.json","json","{\"dispute_scope\": \"[\\\"whether the Exhibit A distribution agreement still contains non-public trade secrets\\\", \\\"whether the customer names and total historical transaction amounts in Exhibit B are already public\\\", \\\"whether the Exhibit C sales forecasts merely repeat the generalized content in the complaint\\\", \\\"whether the Exhibit D damages calculation spreadsheet has commercial sensitivity requiring sealing\\\", \\\"whether complete sealing exceeds the necessary scope\\\"]\", \"document_type\": \"Court ruling on sealing application and objection to confidentiality designations\", \"protection_bases\": \"[\\\"trade secret risk\\\", \\\"risk of competitive harm\\\", \\\"confidentiality designation made unilaterally by the plaintiff\\\", \\\"application to restrict public access to litigation exhibits\\\"]\", \"parties_and_roles\": \"[\\\"Plaintiff: applicant for complete sealing and claimant of trade secret protection\\\", \\\"Defendant: litigant objecting to the sealing application\\\", \\\"Court: reviews the public interest in litigation records and the necessity of sealing\\\", \\\"Public and media: potential viewers of litigation records\\\", \\\"Clerk: responsible for completing formatting review and publicly filing the exhibits\\\"]\", \"disclosure_outcome\": \"Public filing; Exhibits A through D are open to the public after ordinary formatting review, with no sealing or redaction applied.\", \"asserted_privileges\": \"[]\", \"key_supporting_spans\": \"[\\\"A sealing application must identify the specific information, the realistic disclosure harm, and the scope of sealing on an item-by-item basis.\\\", \\\"A generalized invocation of trade secrets or confidentiality labels affixed by the parties themselves is insufficient to overcome the presumption that litigation records are public.\\\", \\\"The applicant did not prove that Exhibits A through D still contain non-public and identifiable trade secrets, nor did it propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing.\\\", \\\"Exhibits A through D should be publicly filed after the clerk completes ordinary formatting review.\\\"]\", \"source_document_text\": \"The plaintiff applied to seal entirely Exhibits A through D to its complaint alleging that the defendant misappropriated customer and pricing strategies, and asserted that they contain 'confidential commercial information' and 'trade secrets.' The defendant objected, pointing out that Exhibit A is a distribution agreement already signed and publicly filed by both parties, the customer names and total historical transaction amounts in Exhibit B have already been disclosed in industry reports and on the defendant's website, Exhibit C lists only sales forecasts already summarized in the complaint, and Exhibit D contains a damages calculation spreadsheet prepared by the plaintiff itself. After review, the court denied the entire sealing application. The court stated that a sealing application must identify the specific information, the realistic disclosure harm, and the scope of sealing on an item-by-item basis; a generalized invocation of trade secrets or confidentiality labels affixed by the parties themselves is insufficient to overcome the presumption that litigation records are public. The applicant did not prove that Exhibits A through D still contain non-public and identifiable trade secrets, nor did it propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing. Exhibits A through D should be publicly filed after the clerk completes ordinary formatting review.\", \"court_treatment_result\": \"The court denied the plaintiff's application to seal all of Exhibits A through D, finding that the plaintiff did not prove specific, realistic disclosure harm on an item-by-item basis and did not propose a sufficiently specific redaction plan.\", \"case_procedural_context\": \"The case is at the stage of filing exhibits to the complaint and reviewing public litigation records; the plaintiff applies to seal all four exhibits, the defendant objects, and the court rules on the necessity of sealing and whether a narrower redaction plan exists.\", \"court_reasoning_summary\": \"The court emphasized that litigation records are presumptively open to the public; a sealing application must prove realistic harm as to specific information and adopt measures no broader than necessary. Exhibits A and B contain already public information, Exhibit C duplicates general content already in the complaint, and Exhibit D's self-preparation does not automatically make it confidential; the plaintiff's generalized labels and request for complete sealing are insufficient to rebut the presumption of public access.\", \"disclosure_restrictions\": \"[\\\"the plaintiff applied to seal all of Exhibits A through D\\\", \\\"request to restrict public inspection of the relevant exhibits during the application\\\", \\\"the plaintiff did not propose specific access tiers or item-by-item redactions\\\"]\", \"material_subject_matter\": \"Materials concerning a distribution agreement, customer identities and historical transaction data, sales forecasts, and damages calculations asserted by the plaintiff.\", \"sealing_or_redaction_scope\": \"[\\\"Exhibit A may not be sealed and the distribution agreement should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"Exhibit B may not be sealed and the customer names and total historical transaction amounts already disclosed in industry reports or on the website should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"Exhibit C may not be sealed and the sales forecast materials should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"Exhibit D may not be sealed and the damages calculation spreadsheet should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"the court did not approve any redaction scope for the exhibits\\\"]\", \"confidentiality_designations\": \"[\\\"confidential commercial information\\\", \\\"trade secrets\\\"]\", \"conditions_or_follow_up_actions\": \"[\\\"the clerk shall publicly file Exhibits A through D after completing ordinary formatting review\\\", \\\"if the plaintiff applies again for sealing, it must identify specific information item by item and prove realistic disclosure harm\\\", \\\"any subsequent protection request must propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing\\\", \\\"the parties may not restrict public access based solely on confidentiality labels they affix themselves\\\"]\", \"protected_information_categories\": \"[\\\"asserted trade secrets\\\", \\\"customer information\\\", \\\"historical transaction data\\\", \\\"sales forecasts\\\", \\\"damages calculation data\\\"]\", \"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld\": \"false\"}","文本","[\"whether the Exhibit A distribution agreement still contains non-public trade secrets\", \"whether the customer names and total historical transaction amounts in Exhibit B are already public\", \"whether the Exhibit C sales forecasts merely repeat the generalized content in the complaint\", \"whether the Exhibit D damages calculation spreadsheet has commercial sensitivity requiring sealing\", \"whether complete sealing exceeds the necessary scope\"]","Court ruling on sealing application and objection to confidentiality designations","[\"trade secret risk\", \"risk of competitive harm\", \"confidentiality designation made unilaterally by the plaintiff\", \"application to restrict public access to litigation exhibits\"]","[\"Plaintiff: applicant for complete sealing and claimant of trade secret protection\", \"Defendant: litigant objecting to the sealing application\", \"Court: reviews the public interest in litigation records and the necessity of sealing\", \"Public and media: potential viewers of litigation records\", \"Clerk: responsible for completing formatting review and publicly filing the exhibits\"]","Public filing; Exhibits A through D are open to the public after ordinary formatting review, with no sealing or redaction applied.","[]","[\"A sealing application must identify the specific information, the realistic disclosure harm, and the scope of sealing on an item-by-item basis.\", \"A generalized invocation of trade secrets or confidentiality labels affixed by the parties themselves is insufficient to overcome the presumption that litigation records are public.\", \"The applicant did not prove that Exhibits A through D still contain non-public and identifiable trade secrets, nor did it propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing.\", \"Exhibits A through D should be publicly filed after the clerk completes ordinary formatting review.\"]","The plaintiff applied to seal entirely Exhibits A through D to its complaint alleging that the defendant misappropriated customer and pricing strategies, and asserted that they contain 'confidential commercial information' and 'trade secrets.' The defendant objected, pointing out that Exhibit A is a distribution agreement already signed and publicly filed by both parties, the customer names and total historical transaction amounts in Exhibit B have already been disclosed in industry reports and on the defendant's website, Exhibit C lists only sales forecasts already summarized in the complaint, and Exhibit D contains a damages calculation spreadsheet prepared by the plaintiff itself. After review, the court denied the entire sealing application. The court stated that a sealing application must identify the specific information, the realistic disclosure harm, and the scope of sealing on an item-by-item basis; a generalized invocation of trade secrets or confidentiality labels affixed by the parties themselves is insufficient to overcome the presumption that litigation records are public. The applicant did not prove that Exhibits A through D still contain non-public and identifiable trade secrets, nor did it propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing. Exhibits A through D should be publicly filed after the clerk completes ordinary formatting review.","The court denied the plaintiff's application to seal all of Exhibits A through D, finding that the plaintiff did not prove specific, realistic disclosure harm on an item-by-item basis and did not propose a sufficiently specific redaction plan.","The case is at the stage of filing exhibits to the complaint and reviewing public litigation records; the plaintiff applies to seal all four exhibits, the defendant objects, and the court rules on the necessity of sealing and whether a narrower redaction plan exists.","The court emphasized that litigation records are presumptively open to the public; a sealing application must prove realistic harm as to specific information and adopt measures no broader than necessary. Exhibits A and B contain already public information, Exhibit C duplicates general content already in the complaint, and Exhibit D's self-preparation does not automatically make it confidential; the plaintiff's generalized labels and request for complete sealing are insufficient to rebut the presumption of public access.","[\"the plaintiff applied to seal all of Exhibits A through D\", \"request to restrict public inspection of the relevant exhibits during the application\", \"the plaintiff did not propose specific access tiers or item-by-item redactions\"]","Materials concerning a distribution agreement, customer identities and historical transaction data, sales forecasts, and damages calculations asserted by the plaintiff.","[\"Exhibit A may not be sealed and the distribution agreement should be publicly filed\", \"Exhibit B may not be sealed and the customer names and total historical transaction amounts already disclosed in industry reports or on the website should be publicly filed\", \"Exhibit C may not be sealed and the sales forecast materials should be publicly filed\", \"Exhibit D may not be sealed and the damages calculation spreadsheet should be publicly filed\", \"the court did not approve any redaction scope for the exhibits\"]","[\"confidential commercial information\", \"trade secrets\"]","[\"the clerk shall publicly file Exhibits A through D after completing ordinary formatting review\", \"if the plaintiff applies again for sealing, it must identify specific information item by item and prove realistic disclosure harm\", \"any subsequent protection request must propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing\", \"the parties may not restrict public access based solely on confidentiality labels they affix themselves\"]","[\"asserted trade secrets\", \"customer information\", \"historical transaction data\", \"sales forecasts\", \"damages calculation data\"]","false",{"id":726,"relate_table":701,"relate_id":727,"file_size":573,"file_name":728,"path":8,"duration":573,"cate":483,"file_format":704,"audio_rate":8,"audio_channel":522,"audio_bit_depth":522,"quality":8,"annotation":729,"cate_name":706,"dispute_scope":730,"document_type":731,"protection_bases":732,"parties_and_roles":733,"disclosure_outcome":734,"asserted_privileges":735,"key_supporting_spans":736,"source_document_text":737,"court_treatment_result":738,"case_procedural_context":739,"court_reasoning_summary":740,"disclosure_restrictions":741,"material_subject_matter":742,"sealing_or_redaction_scope":743,"confidentiality_designations":744,"conditions_or_follow_up_actions":745,"protected_information_categories":746,"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld":747},15137,1652390858,"样例_2.json","{\"dispute_scope\": \"[\\\"whether PL-014 through PL-027 are attorney-client privileged communications\\\", \\\"whether copying finance personnel waived privilege\\\", \\\"whether the investigation lists and risk analyses in PL-028 through PL-031 are attorney work product\\\", \\\"whether the sales reports and public market data in the work product attachments can be disclosed separately\\\", \\\"whether emails PL-032 through PL-036 concerning only business matters are privileged\\\"]\", \"document_type\": \"Privilege log and related court ruling\", \"protection_bases\": \"[\\\"primary purpose of the communications was to seek or provide legal advice\\\", \\\"confidential communications among necessary company personnel\\\", \\\"factual investigation and risk analysis prepared by counsel in anticipation of litigation\\\", \\\"unmodified sales reports and public market data have no independent privilege\\\"]\", \"parties_and_roles\": \"[\\\"Defendant company: privilege claimant and submitter of the privilege log\\\", \\\"Defendant's general counsel: in-house attorney providing legal advice\\\", \\\"Chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and relevant finance personnel: company employees and communication recipients involved in legal matters\\\", \\\"Outside counsel: attorney who prepared litigation-related investigation lists and risk analyses\\\", \\\"Plaintiff: opposing party that filed the motion to compel and challenged the privilege log\\\"]\", \"disclosure_outcome\": \"Limited-scope disclosure; privileged communications and attorney analysis are not disclosed, while underlying factual attachments and ordinary business emails are disclosed after redaction or removal of designations.\", \"asserted_privileges\": \"[\\\"attorney-client privilege\\\", \\\"attorney work product protection\\\"]\", \"key_supporting_spans\": \"[\\\"The court finds that the primary purpose of these communications was to obtain or provide legal advice, and disclosure was limited to necessary company personnel, so attorney-client privilege applies.\\\", \\\"Numbers PL-028 through PL-031 are factual investigation lists and risk analyses drafted by outside counsel in response to litigation demands and constitute attorney work product.\\\", \\\"The unmodified sales reports and public market data are not themselves protected by privilege.\\\", \\\"These emails discuss only sales targets, discount approvals, and business forecasts, involve no attorney, and do not show a request for legal advice.\\\"]\", \"source_document_text\": \"Regarding the privilege log submitted by the defendant, the court rules as follows. Emails numbered PL-014 through PL-027 were sent between the defendant company's general counsel and the company's chief financial officer and chief executive officer, with subject matter seeking or providing legal advice concerning acquisition negotiations and a potential regulatory investigation; the two finance personnel copied on the emails are company employees involved in the matter. The court finds that the primary purpose of these communications was to obtain or provide legal advice, and disclosure was limited to necessary company personnel, so attorney-client privilege applies. Numbers PL-028 through PL-031 are factual investigation lists and risk analyses drafted by outside counsel in response to litigation demands and constitute attorney work product, but the unmodified sales reports and public market data attached therein are not themselves protected by privilege. The defendant shall provide, within seven days, copies of the attachments with the privileged analysis portions removed. The court does not accept the defendant's blanket privilege claim over numbers PL-032 through PL-036, because those emails discuss only sales targets, discount approvals, and business forecasts, involve no attorney, and do not show a request for legal advice.\", \"court_treatment_result\": \"The court granted the defendant's privilege claims in part: it confirmed that PL-014 through PL-027 are protected by attorney-client privilege and that the privileged analysis portions of PL-028 through PL-031 are protected as attorney work product; it rejected the blanket privilege claim over PL-032 through PL-036 and ordered that redacted, non-privileged attachments be provided.\", \"case_procedural_context\": \"The case is at the stage of a motion to compel disclosure and privilege log review; the plaintiff challenges the defendant's blanket privilege claims over three groups of emails and attachments, and the court makes item-by-item rulings based on the submitted privilege log and sampled materials.\", \"court_reasoning_summary\": \"The court applies the primary purpose and specific content of the communications as the test. Necessary company employees involved in acquisition and regulatory matters fall within the company's attorney-client circle, and internal transmission does not constitute waiver. Investigation lists and risk analyses prepared by counsel in anticipation of litigation are work product, but underlying factual materials do not automatically gain privilege merely because they are attached to attorney documents. Emails discussing only sales and business forecasts with no attorney involvement do not reflect a legal advice purpose.\", \"disclosure_restrictions\": \"[\\\"privileged communications may not be disclosed to the plaintiff\\\", \\\"privileged analysis portions of attorney work product may not be disclosed\\\", \\\"non-privileged sales reports and public market data should be disclosed in a form with privileged content removed\\\", \\\"the defendant may not use privilege markings to cover ordinary business communications that do not contain legal advice\\\"]\", \"material_subject_matter\": \"Internal company communications and attorney work documents concerning acquisition negotiations, regulatory investigations, litigation risk analysis, sales targets, discount approvals, and business forecasts.\", \"sealing_or_redaction_scope\": \"[\\\"the complete communications PL-014 through PL-027 remain privileged and are not disclosed to the plaintiff\\\", \\\"PL-028 through PL-031: disclose the sales reports and public market data after removing attorney analysis and legal assessment\\\", \\\"PL-032 through PL-036 may not be redacted on privilege grounds and should be produced as ordinary business communications\\\"]\", \"confidentiality_designations\": \"[\\\"Attorney-Client Privileged\\\", \\\"Attorney Work Product\\\", \\\"Privileged and Confidential\\\"]\", \"conditions_or_follow_up_actions\": \"[\\\"the defendant must provide redacted versions of the attachments to PL-028 through PL-031 within seven days\\\", \\\"the defendant must update the privilege log, separately stating for each item the communication participants, dates, and legal advice purpose\\\", \\\"the defendant must remove the privilege designations from PL-032 through PL-036 and produce them under ordinary disclosure procedures\\\", \\\"the parties may not use privileged analysis content in public filings\\\"]\", \"protected_information_categories\": \"[\\\"legal advice communications\\\", \\\"attorney work product\\\", \\\"legal analysis of acquisition negotiations\\\", \\\"legal advice on regulatory investigations\\\", \\\"litigation risk analysis\\\"]\", \"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld\": \"true\"}","[\"whether PL-014 through PL-027 are attorney-client privileged communications\", \"whether copying finance personnel waived privilege\", \"whether the investigation lists and risk analyses in PL-028 through PL-031 are attorney work product\", \"whether the sales reports and public market data in the work product attachments can be disclosed separately\", \"whether emails PL-032 through PL-036 concerning only business matters are privileged\"]","Privilege log and related court ruling","[\"primary purpose of the communications was to seek or provide legal advice\", \"confidential communications among necessary company personnel\", \"factual investigation and risk analysis prepared by counsel in anticipation of litigation\", \"unmodified sales reports and public market data have no independent privilege\"]","[\"Defendant company: privilege claimant and submitter of the privilege log\", \"Defendant's general counsel: in-house attorney providing legal advice\", \"Chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and relevant finance personnel: company employees and communication recipients involved in legal matters\", \"Outside counsel: attorney who prepared litigation-related investigation lists and risk analyses\", \"Plaintiff: opposing party that filed the motion to compel and challenged the privilege log\"]","Limited-scope disclosure; privileged communications and attorney analysis are not disclosed, while underlying factual attachments and ordinary business emails are disclosed after redaction or removal of designations.","[\"attorney-client privilege\", \"attorney work product protection\"]","[\"The court finds that the primary purpose of these communications was to obtain or provide legal advice, and disclosure was limited to necessary company personnel, so attorney-client privilege applies.\", \"Numbers PL-028 through PL-031 are factual investigation lists and risk analyses drafted by outside counsel in response to litigation demands and constitute attorney work product.\", \"The unmodified sales reports and public market data are not themselves protected by privilege.\", \"These emails discuss only sales targets, discount approvals, and business forecasts, involve no attorney, and do not show a request for legal advice.\"]","Regarding the privilege log submitted by the defendant, the court rules as follows. Emails numbered PL-014 through PL-027 were sent between the defendant company's general counsel and the company's chief financial officer and chief executive officer, with subject matter seeking or providing legal advice concerning acquisition negotiations and a potential regulatory investigation; the two finance personnel copied on the emails are company employees involved in the matter. The court finds that the primary purpose of these communications was to obtain or provide legal advice, and disclosure was limited to necessary company personnel, so attorney-client privilege applies. Numbers PL-028 through PL-031 are factual investigation lists and risk analyses drafted by outside counsel in response to litigation demands and constitute attorney work product, but the unmodified sales reports and public market data attached therein are not themselves protected by privilege. The defendant shall provide, within seven days, copies of the attachments with the privileged analysis portions removed. The court does not accept the defendant's blanket privilege claim over numbers PL-032 through PL-036, because those emails discuss only sales targets, discount approvals, and business forecasts, involve no attorney, and do not show a request for legal advice.","The court granted the defendant's privilege claims in part: it confirmed that PL-014 through PL-027 are protected by attorney-client privilege and that the privileged analysis portions of PL-028 through PL-031 are protected as attorney work product; it rejected the blanket privilege claim over PL-032 through PL-036 and ordered that redacted, non-privileged attachments be provided.","The case is at the stage of a motion to compel disclosure and privilege log review; the plaintiff challenges the defendant's blanket privilege claims over three groups of emails and attachments, and the court makes item-by-item rulings based on the submitted privilege log and sampled materials.","The court applies the primary purpose and specific content of the communications as the test. Necessary company employees involved in acquisition and regulatory matters fall within the company's attorney-client circle, and internal transmission does not constitute waiver. Investigation lists and risk analyses prepared by counsel in anticipation of litigation are work product, but underlying factual materials do not automatically gain privilege merely because they are attached to attorney documents. Emails discussing only sales and business forecasts with no attorney involvement do not reflect a legal advice purpose.","[\"privileged communications may not be disclosed to the plaintiff\", \"privileged analysis portions of attorney work product may not be disclosed\", \"non-privileged sales reports and public market data should be disclosed in a form with privileged content removed\", \"the defendant may not use privilege markings to cover ordinary business communications that do not contain legal advice\"]","Internal company communications and attorney work documents concerning acquisition negotiations, regulatory investigations, litigation risk analysis, sales targets, discount approvals, and business forecasts.","[\"the complete communications PL-014 through PL-027 remain privileged and are not disclosed to the plaintiff\", \"PL-028 through PL-031: disclose the sales reports and public market data after removing attorney analysis and legal assessment\", \"PL-032 through PL-036 may not be redacted on privilege grounds and should be produced as ordinary business communications\"]","[\"Attorney-Client Privileged\", \"Attorney Work Product\", \"Privileged and Confidential\"]","[\"the defendant must provide redacted versions of the attachments to PL-028 through PL-031 within seven days\", \"the defendant must update the privilege log, separately stating for each item the communication participants, dates, and legal advice purpose\", \"the defendant must remove the privilege designations from PL-032 through PL-036 and produce them under ordinary disclosure procedures\", \"the parties may not use privileged analysis content in public filings\"]","[\"legal advice communications\", \"attorney work product\", \"legal analysis of acquisition negotiations\", \"legal advice on regulatory investigations\", \"litigation risk analysis\"]","true",{"id":749,"relate_table":701,"relate_id":750,"file_size":573,"file_name":751,"path":8,"duration":573,"cate":483,"file_format":704,"audio_rate":8,"audio_channel":522,"audio_bit_depth":522,"quality":8,"annotation":752,"cate_name":706,"dispute_scope":753,"document_type":754,"protection_bases":755,"parties_and_roles":756,"disclosure_outcome":757,"asserted_privileges":712,"key_supporting_spans":758,"source_document_text":759,"court_treatment_result":760,"case_procedural_context":761,"court_reasoning_summary":762,"disclosure_restrictions":763,"material_subject_matter":764,"sealing_or_redaction_scope":765,"confidentiality_designations":766,"conditions_or_follow_up_actions":767,"protected_information_categories":768,"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld":747},15136,1152255435,"样例_1.json","{\"dispute_scope\": \"[\\\"whether the product roadmap is highly confidential material\\\", \\\"the confidentiality level of the non-public pricing schedule, customer list, and supplier discount agreements\\\", \\\"whether experts may access highly confidential materials\\\", \\\"whether product functions and general industry background already disclosed on the public website may still be kept confidential\\\"]\", \"document_type\": \"Protective order (court-issued protective order)\", \"protection_bases\": \"[\\\"risk of competitive harm from non-public commercial information\\\", \\\"trade secret protection\\\", \\\"disclosure to competitors may cause irreparable harm\\\", \\\"necessity of restricted use in litigation\\\"]\", \"parties_and_roles\": \"[\\\"Xinglan Medical Technology Co., Ltd.: plaintiff that submitted and asserted protection of commercial materials\\\", \\\"Defendant: litigant that objected to the confidentiality designations and scope of expert access\\\", \\\"outside counsel for both parties: litigation representatives permitted to access protected materials\\\", \\\"court-approved experts: may access highly confidential materials after signing confidentiality undertakings\\\", \\\"non-parties and competitors: persons prohibited from accessing protected materials\\\"]\", \"disclosure_outcome\": \"Limited-scope disclosure; protected materials are for use only in this litigation, and public documents must be filed in redacted form.\", \"asserted_privileges\": \"[]\", \"key_supporting_spans\": \"[\\\"Materials designated as highly confidential may be inspected only by the litigants, their outside counsel, court-approved experts, and persons providing support in this case who have signed a confidentiality undertaking.\\\", \\\"The court finds that the materials contain non-public competitive commercial information, and disclosure to competitors could cause concrete and irreparable competitive harm.\\\", \\\"Paragraphs concerning product functions and general industry background already disclosed on Party A's public website may no longer be marked confidential.\\\"]\", \"source_document_text\": \"The court issues the following protective order: the product roadmap, non-public pricing schedule, customer list, and supplier discount agreements submitted by Party A, Xinglan Medical Technology Co., Ltd., in this litigation may be designated 'Confidential' or 'Highly Confidential—Attorneys and Experts Only.' Materials designated as highly confidential may be inspected only by the litigants, their outside counsel, court-approved experts, and persons providing support in this case who have signed a confidentiality undertaking. No party may use protected materials for business, marketing, or competitive purposes outside this case, disclose them to non-parties, or copy them without permission. The court finds that the materials contain non-public competitive commercial information, and disclosure to competitors could cause concrete and irreparable competitive harm; however, paragraphs concerning product functions and general industry background already disclosed on Party A's public website may no longer be marked confidential. The parties shall use redacted versions when filing public pleadings or evidence and shall submit within fourteen days a confidentiality list specifying page numbers and the reasons for redaction on an item-by-item basis.\", \"court_treatment_result\": \"The court granted the protective order application in part: it confirmed that the designated commercial information may receive confidentiality protection, but excluded product functions and general industry background already public, and established tiered access and public filing procedures.\", \"case_procedural_context\": \"The case is in the discovery phase, and the parties dispute the confidential designation of commercial materials submitted by Party A and expert access permissions; after reviewing the parties' applications regarding the protective order, the court issued this order.\", \"court_reasoning_summary\": \"The court found that non-public pricing, customer, supplier, and product planning information is competitively sensitive and that disclosure could cause concrete competitive harm, making restrictions on access and use necessary. For information already public, a mere confidentiality marking is insufficient to prove a continuing protective interest, and public access may not continue to be restricted.\", \"disclosure_restrictions\": \"[\\\"use limited to this litigation\\\", \\\"highly confidential materials accessible only to parties, outside counsel, approved experts, and support personnel who have signed confidentiality undertakings\\\", \\\"no disclosure to non-parties\\\", \\\"no copying without permission\\\", \\\"redacted versions required for public filings\\\"]\", \"material_subject_matter\": \"Evidence materials concerning medical software product roadmap, non-public pricing strategy, customer and supplier relationships, and related commercial contracts.\", \"sealing_or_redaction_scope\": \"[\\\"specific paragraphs in public pleadings and evidence concerning non-public pricing, customer lists, supplier discounts, and product roadmaps should be redacted\\\", \\\"product functions and general industry background already disclosed on the public website remain public\\\", \\\"highly confidential materials themselves may be filed under the protective order with restricted access\\\"]\", \"confidentiality_designations\": \"[\\\"Confidential\\\", \\\"Highly Confidential—Attorneys and Experts Only\\\"]\", \"conditions_or_follow_up_actions\": \"[\\\"experts and support personnel accessing highly confidential materials must sign confidentiality undertakings\\\", \\\"the parties must submit within fourteen days a confidentiality list specifying page numbers and reasons for redaction on an item-by-item basis\\\", \\\"use redacted versions when filing public pleadings or evidence\\\", \\\"materials may not be used for commercial or competitive purposes outside this case\\\"]\", \"protected_information_categories\": \"[\\\"trade secrets\\\", \\\"non-public pricing information\\\", \\\"customer lists\\\", \\\"supplier discounts and contract terms\\\", \\\"product roadmaps\\\"]\", \"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld\": \"true\"}","[\"whether the product roadmap is highly confidential material\", \"the confidentiality level of the non-public pricing schedule, customer list, and supplier discount agreements\", \"whether experts may access highly confidential materials\", \"whether product functions and general industry background already disclosed on the public website may still be kept confidential\"]","Protective order (court-issued protective order)","[\"risk of competitive harm from non-public commercial information\", \"trade secret protection\", \"disclosure to competitors may cause irreparable harm\", \"necessity of restricted use in litigation\"]","[\"Xinglan Medical Technology Co., Ltd.: plaintiff that submitted and asserted protection of commercial materials\", \"Defendant: litigant that objected to the confidentiality designations and scope of expert access\", \"outside counsel for both parties: litigation representatives permitted to access protected materials\", \"court-approved experts: may access highly confidential materials after signing confidentiality undertakings\", \"non-parties and competitors: persons prohibited from accessing protected materials\"]","Limited-scope disclosure; protected materials are for use only in this litigation, and public documents must be filed in redacted form.","[\"Materials designated as highly confidential may be inspected only by the litigants, their outside counsel, court-approved experts, and persons providing support in this case who have signed a confidentiality undertaking.\", \"The court finds that the materials contain non-public competitive commercial information, and disclosure to competitors could cause concrete and irreparable competitive harm.\", \"Paragraphs concerning product functions and general industry background already disclosed on Party A's public website may no longer be marked confidential.\"]","The court issues the following protective order: the product roadmap, non-public pricing schedule, customer list, and supplier discount agreements submitted by Party A, Xinglan Medical Technology Co., Ltd., in this litigation may be designated 'Confidential' or 'Highly Confidential—Attorneys and Experts Only.' Materials designated as highly confidential may be inspected only by the litigants, their outside counsel, court-approved experts, and persons providing support in this case who have signed a confidentiality undertaking. No party may use protected materials for business, marketing, or competitive purposes outside this case, disclose them to non-parties, or copy them without permission. The court finds that the materials contain non-public competitive commercial information, and disclosure to competitors could cause concrete and irreparable competitive harm; however, paragraphs concerning product functions and general industry background already disclosed on Party A's public website may no longer be marked confidential. The parties shall use redacted versions when filing public pleadings or evidence and shall submit within fourteen days a confidentiality list specifying page numbers and the reasons for redaction on an item-by-item basis.","The court granted the protective order application in part: it confirmed that the designated commercial information may receive confidentiality protection, but excluded product functions and general industry background already public, and established tiered access and public filing procedures.","The case is in the discovery phase, and the parties dispute the confidential designation of commercial materials submitted by Party A and expert access permissions; after reviewing the parties' applications regarding the protective order, the court issued this order.","The court found that non-public pricing, customer, supplier, and product planning information is competitively sensitive and that disclosure could cause concrete competitive harm, making restrictions on access and use necessary. For information already public, a mere confidentiality marking is insufficient to prove a continuing protective interest, and public access may not continue to be restricted.","[\"use limited to this litigation\", \"highly confidential materials accessible only to parties, outside counsel, approved experts, and support personnel who have signed confidentiality undertakings\", \"no disclosure to non-parties\", \"no copying without permission\", \"redacted versions required for public filings\"]","Evidence materials concerning medical software product roadmap, non-public pricing strategy, customer and supplier relationships, and related commercial contracts.","[\"specific paragraphs in public pleadings and evidence concerning non-public pricing, customer lists, supplier discounts, and product roadmaps should be redacted\", \"product functions and general industry background already disclosed on the public website remain public\", \"highly confidential materials themselves may be filed under the protective order with restricted access\"]","[\"Confidential\", \"Highly Confidential—Attorneys and Experts Only\"]","[\"experts and support personnel accessing highly confidential materials must sign confidentiality undertakings\", \"the parties must submit within fourteen days a confidentiality list specifying page numbers and reasons for redaction on an item-by-item basis\", \"use redacted versions when filing public pleadings or evidence\", \"materials may not be used for commercial or competitive purposes outside this case\"]","[\"trade secrets\", \"non-public pricing information\", \"customer lists\", \"supplier discounts and contract terms\", \"product roadmaps\"]","{\"dispute_scope\":\"[\\\"whether the Exhibit A distribution agreement still contains non-public trade secrets\\\", \\\"whether the customer names and total historical transaction amounts in Exhibit B are already public\\\", \\\"whether the Exhibit C sales forecasts merely repeat the generalized content in the complaint\\\", \\\"whether the Exhibit D damages calculation spreadsheet has commercial sensitivity requiring sealing\\\", \\\"whether complete sealing exceeds the necessary scope\\\"]\",\"document_type\":\"Court ruling on sealing application and objection to confidentiality designations\",\"protection_bases\":\"[\\\"trade secret risk\\\", \\\"risk of competitive harm\\\", \\\"confidentiality designation made unilaterally by the plaintiff\\\", \\\"application to restrict public access to litigation exhibits\\\"]\",\"parties_and_roles\":\"[\\\"Plaintiff: applicant for complete sealing and claimant of trade secret protection\\\", \\\"Defendant: litigant objecting to the sealing application\\\", \\\"Court: reviews the public interest in litigation records and the necessity of sealing\\\", \\\"Public and media: potential viewers of litigation records\\\", \\\"Clerk: responsible for completing formatting review and publicly filing the exhibits\\\"]\",\"disclosure_outcome\":\"Public filing; Exhibits A through D are open to the public after ordinary formatting review, with no sealing or redaction applied.\",\"asserted_privileges\":\"[]\",\"key_supporting_spans\":\"[\\\"A sealing application must identify the specific information, the realistic disclosure harm, and the scope of sealing on an item-by-item basis.\\\", \\\"A generalized invocation of trade secrets or confidentiality labels affixed by the parties themselves is insufficient to overcome the presumption that litigation records are public.\\\", \\\"The applicant did not prove that Exhibits A through D still contain non-public and identifiable trade secrets, nor did it propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing.\\\", \\\"Exhibits A through D should be publicly filed after the clerk completes ordinary formatting review.\\\"]\",\"source_document_text\":\"The plaintiff applied to seal entirely Exhibits A through D to its complaint alleging that the defendant misappropriated customer and pricing strategies, and asserted that they contain 'confidential commercial information' and 'trade secrets.' The defendant objected, pointing out that Exhibit A is a distribution agreement already signed and publicly filed by both parties, the customer names and total historical transaction amounts in Exhibit B have already been disclosed in industry reports and on the defendant's website, Exhibit C lists only sales forecasts already summarized in the complaint, and Exhibit D contains a damages calculation spreadsheet prepared by the plaintiff itself. After review, the court denied the entire sealing application. The court stated that a sealing application must identify the specific information, the realistic disclosure harm, and the scope of sealing on an item-by-item basis; a generalized invocation of trade secrets or confidentiality labels affixed by the parties themselves is insufficient to overcome the presumption that litigation records are public. The applicant did not prove that Exhibits A through D still contain non-public and identifiable trade secrets, nor did it propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing. Exhibits A through D should be publicly filed after the clerk completes ordinary formatting review.\",\"court_treatment_result\":\"The court denied the plaintiff's application to seal all of Exhibits A through D, finding that the plaintiff did not prove specific, realistic disclosure harm on an item-by-item basis and did not propose a sufficiently specific redaction plan.\",\"case_procedural_context\":\"The case is at the stage of filing exhibits to the complaint and reviewing public litigation records; the plaintiff applies to seal all four exhibits, the defendant objects, and the court rules on the necessity of sealing and whether a narrower redaction plan exists.\",\"court_reasoning_summary\":\"The court emphasized that litigation records are presumptively open to the public; a sealing application must prove realistic harm as to specific information and adopt measures no broader than necessary. Exhibits A and B contain already public information, Exhibit C duplicates general content already in the complaint, and Exhibit D's self-preparation does not automatically make it confidential; the plaintiff's generalized labels and request for complete sealing are insufficient to rebut the presumption of public access.\",\"disclosure_restrictions\":\"[\\\"the plaintiff applied to seal all of Exhibits A through D\\\", \\\"request to restrict public inspection of the relevant exhibits during the application\\\", \\\"the plaintiff did not propose specific access tiers or item-by-item redactions\\\"]\",\"material_subject_matter\":\"Materials concerning a distribution agreement, customer identities and historical transaction data, sales forecasts, and damages calculations asserted by the plaintiff.\",\"sealing_or_redaction_scope\":\"[\\\"Exhibit A may not be sealed and the distribution agreement should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"Exhibit B may not be sealed and the customer names and total historical transaction amounts already disclosed in industry reports or on the website should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"Exhibit C may not be sealed and the sales forecast materials should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"Exhibit D may not be sealed and the damages calculation spreadsheet should be publicly filed\\\", \\\"the court did not approve any redaction scope for the exhibits\\\"]\",\"confidentiality_designations\":\"[\\\"confidential commercial information\\\", \\\"trade secrets\\\"]\",\"conditions_or_follow_up_actions\":\"[\\\"the clerk shall publicly file Exhibits A through D after completing ordinary formatting review\\\", \\\"if the plaintiff applies again for sealing, it must identify specific information item by item and prove realistic disclosure harm\\\", \\\"any subsequent protection request must propose a redaction plan narrower than complete sealing\\\", \\\"the parties may not restrict public access based solely on confidentiality labels they affix themselves\\\"]\",\"protected_information_categories\":\"[\\\"asserted trade secrets\\\", \\\"customer information\\\", \\\"historical transaction data\\\", \\\"sales forecasts\\\", \\\"damages calculation data\\\"]\",\"privilege_or_confidentiality_upheld\":\"false\"}","MOBIUSI INC","https:\u002F\u002Fstatic.mobiusi.com\u002Fmobiwusi\u002F20250829\u002F7bf4ac62b4533e2b809998a6f1c5491e.png?Expires=1792463130&OSSAccessKeyId=LTAI5tH8MQqhgeiAtrzCHrxM&Signature=v6Tr8jBrdm4s5wU1SnnyGsYg%2Bhw%3D&x-oss-process=image%2Fresize%2Cm_fill%2Cw_35%2Ch_35",[773,779],{"type":774,"title":775,"count_data":776},"bar","Length distribution",[777],{"name":778,"value":483},"1k lower",{"type":780,"title":781,"count_data":782},"pie","Language distribution",[783],{"name":784,"value":483},"English"]