Harkey v. General Electric Company

Filing 96

ORDER granting 64 Motion for Reconsideration and vacating 59 ORDER on 54 Motion to Seal. Signed by Judge Warren W. Eginton on 4/23/15. (Ladd-Smith, I.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
GLEN GRAYSON and DOREEN
MAZZANTI, individually and
on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,
Defendant.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

3:13cv1799 (WWE)

RULING ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
In this action, plaintiffs Glen Grayson and Doreen Mazzanti bring a putative class
action on behalf of consumers who purchased GE Microwave ovens with a dangerous
design defect that caused the glass doors to shatter and explode.
Defendant General Electric moved to have this Court seal portions of plaintiffs’
opposition to defendant’s second motion to dismiss. In the abundance of caution, this
Court granted the motion to seal. Plaintiffs now seek reconsideration of that order. For
the following reasons, the motion for reconsideration will be granted. Upon review, the
Court will vacate its prior order.
DISCUSSION
A motion for reconsideration may be based solely upon “matters or controlling
decisions which counsel believes the Court overlooked in the initial decision or order.”
D. Conn. Local R. Civ. P. 7(c)(1). Such a motion should be granted only where the
Court has overlooked facts or precedents that might have “materially influenced” the
earlier decision. Park South Tenants Corp. v. 200 Cent. Park South Assocs. L.P., 754
1

F. Supp. 352, 354 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). The movant’s burden is made weighty to avoid
“wasteful repetition of arguments already briefed, considered and decided.” Weissman
v. Fruchtman, 124 F.R.D. 559, 560 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).
Upon a showing of compelling circumstances, the court may order certain
records to be sealed. See Joy v. North, 692 F.2d 880, 893 (2d Cir.1982). Judicial
records enjoy a “presumption of openness” that is rebuttable upon a demonstration that
sealing the record will preserve high values and is narrowly tailored to serve that
interest. Hartford Courant Co. v. Pellegrino, 380 F.3d 83, 96 (2d Cir. 2004). A judge
should carefully and skeptically review sealing requests to insure that there is an
extraordinary circumstance or compelling need. In re Orion Pictures Corp., 21 F.3d 24,
27 (2d Cir. 1994).
In this instance, GE argues that sealing documents reflecting its analysis of
consumer injuries and complaints of defective microwaves is necessary to protect
confidential and proprietary information. In particular, GE asserts that the records
contain confidential business information, the disclosure of which might harm its
competitive standing. GE notes that publicly disclosing this information might lead a
competitor to improve the safety of its products more quickly than it otherwise would if
the information had not been disclosed.
“Documents falling into categories commonly sealed are those containing trade
secrets, confidential research and development information, marketing plans, revenue
information, pricing information, and the like.” Cumberland Packing Corp. v. Montsanto
Co., 184 F.R.D. 504, 506 (E.D.N.Y. 1999). However, “non-trade secret but confidential
business information is not entitled to the same level of protection from disclosure as
2

trade secret information,” and protection of a corporation’s reputation or from the
commercial effects of negative information has not been given significant weight.
Littlejohn v. Bic Corp., 851 F.2d 673, 685 (3d Cir. 1988). In this instance, GE’s interest
in preserving its confidential analysis of consumer complaints and injuries does not
outweigh the presumption of public access and the public interest in product safety.
See In re Agent Product Liability Litig., 98 F.R.D. 539, 545-548 (E.D.N.Y. 1983).
Accordingly, the Court will vacate its prior order granting the motion to seal.

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the motion for reconsideration
(doc. #64) and hereby VACATES its prior ruling granting the motion to seal.
Dated this 23rd day of April 2015 at Bridgeport, Connecticut.

/s/Warren W. Eginton
Warren W. Eginton
Senior United States District Judge

3