INDIVIOR INC. et al v. ALVOGEN PINE BROOK, INC.

Filing 483

ORDER granting the 482 Motion to Seal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cathy L. Waldor on 9/21/2022. (qa, )

Case 2:17-cv-07106-KM-CLW Document 483 Filed 09/21/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 30112

Charles M. Lizza
William C. Baton
Sarah A. Sullivan
SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
One Riverfront Plaza, Suite 1520
Newark, New Jersey 07102-5426
[phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Indivior Inc., Indivior UK Limited, and
Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
INDIVIOR INC., INDIVIOR UK LIMITED, and
AQUESTIVE THERAPEUTICS, INC.,
Civil Action No. 17-7106 (KM)(CLW)
Civil Action No. 18-5285 (KM)(CLW)
(Consolidated)

Plaintiffs,
v.

(Filed Electronically)
ALVOGEN PINE BROOK LLC,
Defendant-Counterclaim-Plaintiff.
ALVOGEN PINE BROOK LLC and ALVOGEN
INC.,
Counterclaim-Plaintiffs,
v.
INDIVIOR INC., INDIVIOR UK LIMITED, and
AQUESTIVE THERAPEUTICS, INC.,
Counterclaim-Defendants.

ORDER TO SEAL

Case 2:17-cv-07106-KM-CLW Document 483 Filed 09/21/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 30113

THIS MATTER having come before the Court pursuant to the motion of Indivior Inc.
and Indivior UK Limited (collectively, “Indivior”) and Alvogen Pine Brook LLC and Alvogen
Inc. (together, “Alvogen”) to seal Indivior’s and Alvogen’s confidential information contained in
certain portions of the August 29, 2022 Transcript of Oral Argument on Summary Judgment
Motions (D.I. 479) (hereinafter, the “Confidential Material”); and the Court having considered
the Indivior’s and Alvogen’s written submissions and the declaration of Sarah A. Sullivan
(counsel for Indivior) and Declaration of Andrea J. Sweet (Vice President, Legal Affairs, of
Alvogen Group, Inc.); and the Court having determined that this action involves allegations
regarding the disclosure of confidential and proprietary information; and for other and good
cause having been shown; the Court makes the following findings and conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.

The information that Indivior and Alvogen seek to seal has been designated by

Indivior and Alvogen as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL—OUTSIDE COUNSEL EYES ONLY”
under the Stipulated Amended Confidentiality Order entered by this Court (D.I. 315) (“DCO”).
2.

By designating the material as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL—OUTSIDE

COUNSEL EYES ONLY” under the DCO, Indivior and Alvogen have represented that the
subject information is proprietary and confidential commercial and/or business information
within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c).
3.

This is a complex pharmaceutical patent infringement and antitrust action. As

such, a significant portion of the materials exchanged in discovery, and subsequently filed with
the Court in connection with pretrial proceedings, contain proprietary and confidential
commercial and/or business information of the parties. The material identified herein contains
information designated by Indivior and Alvogen as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL—OUTSIDE

-2-

Case 2:17-cv-07106-KM-CLW Document 483 Filed 09/21/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 30114

COUNSEL EYES ONLY,” and includes their proprietary and confidential commercial and/or
business information (the “parties’ Confidential Materials”).
4.

By designating this information “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL—OUTSIDE

COUNSEL EYES ONLY,” Indivior and Alvogen have indicated that the public disclosure of
this information would be detrimental to their businesses. Due to the nature of the materials
herein, there is no less restrictive alternative to sealing the parties’ Confidential Materials.
5.

Indivior’s and Alvogen’s request is narrowly tailored to only parties’ Confidential

Materials.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
6.

Upon consideration of the papers submitted in support of the motion, and the

information that Indivior and Alvogen have designated as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” or
“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL—OUTSIDE COUNSEL EYES ONLY,” the Court concludes that
Indivior and Alvogen have met their burden of proving, under Local Civil Rule 5.3 and
applicable case law, that the information described above should be sealed. See Pansy v.
Borough of Stroudsburg, 23 F.3d 772, 787 (3d Cir. 1994). Specifically, the Court concludes
that: (a) the Confidential Material contains confidential information concerning Indivior’s and
Alvogen’s proprietary and confidential commercial and/or business information; (b) Indivior and
Alvogen have a legitimate interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the information to protect
its disclosure to potential competitors who could use the information contained therein to
develop and market competing products; (c) public disclosure of the confidential information
would result in clearly defined and serious injury, including the use of confidential information
by competitors to Indivior’s and Alvogen’s financial detriment; and (d) no less restrictive
alternative to sealing the subject information is available.

-3-

Case 2:17-cv-07106-KM-CLW Document 483 Filed 09/21/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 30115

7.

The foregoing conclusions are supported by relevant case law holding that the

right of public access to the full court transcript is not absolute and may be overcome by a
showing such as made here, in the discretion of the trial court. See Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns,
Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 603 (1978). The Court, upon such a proper showing, may in its discretion
prevent confidential information from being “transmuted into materials presumptively subject to
public access.” Gambale v. Deutsche Bank AG, 377 F.3d 133, 143 n.8 (2d Cir. 2004).
IT IS on this 21st day of September, 2022:
ORDERED that based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the
motion to seal, (ECF No. 482), is hereby GRANTED; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the unredacted version of the transcript of the
August 29, 2022 motion hearing, (ECF No. 479), shall remain sealed; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the portions of that transcript described in the
indices attached to the parties' respective certifications, (ECF Nos. 482-1, 482-3), shall remain
sealed and shall be redacted from any publicly available transcript; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit to the court reporter a
Statement of Redaction and Sealing, consistent with the terms of this Order, in accordance with
Local Civil Rule 5.3(g)(2); and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court Reporter shall thereafter submit an
appropriately redacted version of the transcript to the Clerk of the Court for public filing.

s/ Cathy L. Waldor
HON. CATHY L. WALDOR, U.S.M.J.

-4-