Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1452

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Victor Marrero from Timothy A. Duffy dated 11/10/2015 re: I write on behalf of my client, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP ("PwC Canada"), defendant PricewaterhouscCoopers Accountants N.V. ("PwC Netherlands") (collectively, the "PwCDefendants") in response to Mr. Wallner's letter of November 5, 2015 asking the Court unseal the parties' motion in limine filings. ENDORSEMENT: The Clerk of Court is directed to enter into the public record of this action the letter above submitted to the Court by PwC Defendants. (Signed by Judge Victor Marrero on 11/16/2015) (lmb) Modified on 11/17/2015 (lmb). Modified on 11/17/2015 (lmb).

KIRKLAND &._ ELLIS LLP
AND AfflLJATlD MRTNlRS..iJPS

300 North LaSalle Street

Chicago, lllif\CJ1s 60654
Timothy A. Duffy, P C.
To Call Writer Directly

(3, 2) 662-2000

Facsimile

\312) 862-2445

t1m

duffy@kirkland

(3, 2) 862-2200

com

www kirkland.coni

- ...--·-··-

November I 0, 2015

_,,,

·-~·--··--·--

..-·

..~-·------,

;1 uS;-UC ~I;:, Y-:··-·I DgCC'.\lL:\T

:IELECTRO:'\!\ ..\ I.LY r: 1 ro .
~~~~~21:1~,~~ '

VIA FAX
Judge Victor Marrero
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007
Re:

Anwar, et al. v. Fairjielil Ciree11wich Limited, et al.

Master File No. 09-CY-OO 118 (VM) (FM)
Dear Judge Marrero:
I write on behalf of my client, PricewaterhouseC<>opers LLP ("PwC Canada"), defendant
PricewaterhouscCoopers Accountants N.V. ("PwC Netherlands") (collectively, the ''PwC
Defendants'') in response to Mr. Wallner's letter of November 5, 2015 asking the Court unseal
the paties' motion in limine filings. lhe Court should deny Mr. Wallner's request.

Mr. Wallner and his client already have access to the documents and testimony
referenced in these filings. He has been directly involved in much of the discovery that has taken
place in this case, and unsealing these documents will not provide him with any additional
information about the facts relevant to either his case or the upcoming trial. All that it would
reveal is the parties' legal arguments concerning certain evidence -- information of little
relevance to him given that his case has been dismissed_ notwithstanding a pending appeal.
Moreover. the authorities on which Mr. Wallner relies arc criminal cases, where there is a
heightened justification for public access to information, that rest their decisions on a finding that
the materials at issue arc "judicial documents.'' The rational for disclosure of such documents is
not, howe\'er, a public interest in the arguments of lawyers. but in access to the underlying
evidence, which Mr. Wallner alre:ady has. See, e.g, United Stales v Martoma, 2013 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 182959 at "'7-12 (Dec. 28, 2013 S.D.N.Y.).
Finally, the parties are diligently preparing for trial and engaging in extensive meet and
confer sessions with regard to exhibits and other cvidcntiary issuc5, the result of which will be a
large measure of agreement about the evidence to be presented at the public trial. To the extent
there arc disagreements about that evidence. the Court will resolve them on the public record. It
Hong Kong

London

l..os Angeles

Munich

New York

Palo A/lo

San I" ranc.sco

Shanghai

Washington. D.C

KIRKLAND&.. ELLIS LLP

November l 1, 2015
Page 2

imposes no hardship on Mr. Wallner or his <.:licnt, a non-party \vith no active case, to await these
decisions and then determine what, if anything, of interest is not publicly disclosed.
Re~pectfull y,

-7~ a. ol7-Af-y. Pc.

/1-..t--

Timothy A Duffy, P.C.

cc:

Counsel of Record (via e/mail)

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter into the public record
of is action the Jeqer bove submitted o the Court by

w