Solomon et al v. Siemens Industry, Inc. et al

Filing 74

ORDER re 67 Letter MOTION to Strike Order on Motion for Protective Order filed by Robert Solomon, Jane Solomon, First Keystone Consultants, Inc., 68 Response to Motion filed by Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, Siemens Indus try, Inc. See Order directing plaintiffs to contact the Clerk of the Court and ensure that the documents and information designated as confidential by defendants are removed from the public record and re-filed, if at all, under seal by the close of business on December 30, 2011. Ordered by Chief Magistrate Judge Steven M. Gold on 12/29/2011. (Gold, Steven)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------- x
ROBERT SOLOMON, JANE SOLOMON, AND
:
FIRST KEYSTONE CONSULTANTS, INC.,
:
:
Plaintiffs,
:
:
-against:
:
SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC., et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
x
--------------------------------------------------------------------GOLD, STEVEN M., U.S.M.J.:

ORDER
11-CV-1321 (DLI)

Upon the stipulation of all parties, this Court entered a protective order on November 4,
2011. The stipulated protective order (“SPO”), Docket Entry 49-1, provides that any party may
seek protection for a document by designating it to be confidential. SPO ¶ 4. The SPO also sets
forth a procedure for challenging a designation of confidentiality. The procedure requires the
receiving party to challenge the designation in writing to the producing party, and to bring a
motion before the Court if the producing party and receiving party are unable to resolve their
disagreement. SPO ¶ 8. The SPO specifically provides that, “[u]ntil the challenging party files
and the Court rules on such a motion, the information, documents, or portions of documents
designated Confidential shall retain their designated status.” SPO ¶ 8.
On December 22, 2011, plaintiffs filed a letter motion seeking to strike the protective
order to which they stipulated in November. Docket Entry 67. Plaintiffs attached documents to
their motion, and filed them publicly, despite the fact that defendants had designated the
documents as confidential pursuant to the SPO. Plaintiffs did not first write to defendants or file
a motion with the Court contesting the designations. Instead, in a blatant and acknowledged
violation of the terms of the SPO, plaintiffs placed the documents on the public record of this

case where they might be viewed by anyone. See DE 67 at 2 (“By attaching these documents,
and not filing this Motion under seal, we technically are in violation of the Protective Order”).
The only justification offered by plaintiffs for their blatant and willful violation of this
Court’s order is their view that defendants designated documents as confidential in bad faith.
The SPO provides a procedure to be followed in such a circumstance. Plaintiffs stipulated they
would follow that procedure, and the Court ordered them to do so. Plaintiffs chose to ignore the
procedure and instead to violate the Order.
By letter motion dated December 27, 2011, Docket Entry 68, defendants ask, among
other things, that plaintiffs be required to cure their improper disclosures of documents and
information produced by defendants. This aspect of defendants’ motion is granted. Plaintiffs
shall contact the Clerk of the Court and ensure that the documents and information designated as
confidential by defendants is removed from the public record and re-filed, if at all, under seal by
the close of business on December 30, 2011. The Court will hear the parties’ other pending
motions, and the other aspects of defendants’ letter motion dated December 27, 2011, at a
conference to be held at 2:30 p.m. on January 11, 2012. Plaintiffs are alerted that the Court will
consider at that time imposing sanctions for the conduct described above, and that future
violations of Court orders will result in the issuance of an order to show cause why a finding of
contempt and severe sanctions should not be imposed.

/s/
STEVEN M. GOLD
United States Magistrate Judge
Brooklyn, New York
December 29, 2011

2