Ameritox, LTD. v. Millennium Laboratories, Inc.

Filing 102

ORDER denying 100 Motion to seal. Signed by Judge Susan C Bucklew on 5/4/2012. (JD)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
AMERITOX, LTD.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No.: 8:11-cv-775-T-24-TBM

MILLENNIUM LABORATORIES, INC.,
Defendant.
____________________________________/
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Millennium Laboratories, Inc.’s
(“Millennium”) Unopposed Motion for Leave to File a Forthcoming Motion for Summary
Judgment Under Seal (Doc. No. 100). Millennium requests leave of Court to file its motion for
summary judgment and all exhibits thereto under seal. Millennium notes that the Court entered a
Stipulation of Confidentiality and Protective Order on November 28, 2011 (Doc. No. 53).
Pursuant to that order, Millennium states, the parties have designated documents and deposition
transcripts as containing “Confidential,” “Highly Confidential,” and “Confidential Health
Information.” Millennium specifically cites the deposition of third-party Keith Walker —
substantial portions of which Plaintiff Ameritox, LTD (“Ameritox”) has designated “Highly
Confidential” — as a document on which it anticipates relying in its motion for summary
judgment. Given Ameritox’s designation, Millennium explains, “the motion and its exhibits
cannot be filed in the public record.” (Doc. No. 100 at 2).
Millennium’s motion is denied. First, Millennium’s request to file its motion for
summary judgment under seal is denied because Millennium cannot show that the motion itself
needs to be filed under seal. Second, should counsel wish to file certain exhibits or portions

thereof under seal, they must move for leave of Court, following the procedure set forth in Local
Rule 1.09. Specifically, they must file a motion that includes: “(i) an identification and
description of each item proposed for sealing;1 (ii) the reason that filing each item is necessary;
(iii) the reason that sealing each item is necessary; (iv) the reason that a means other than sealing
is unavailable or unsatisfactory to preserve the interest advanced by the movant in support of the
seal; (v) a statement of the proposed duration of the seal; and (vi) a memorandum of legal
authority supporting the seal.” Local Rule 1.09(a).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Millennium’s Unopposed Motion
for Leave to File a Forthcoming Motion for Summary Judgment Under Seal (Doc. No. 100) is
DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, this 4th day of May, 2012.

Copies to:
Counsel of Record

1

It is unclear from the motion whether Millennium seeks to file only Walker’s
deposition and the exhibits thereto under seal, or whether there are other exhibits Millennium
seeks to file under seal. Furthermore, Millennium must identify each exhibit it seeks to file
under seal.
2