IN RE ACTOS END PAYOR ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Filing 413

ORDER: Before the Court are requests to seal certain documents filed in connection with Plaintiffs' August 30, 2022 Letter Motion (ECF Nos. 394) and Plaintiffs' Reply in support of their Letter Motion (ECF Nos. 405). (See 9/1/2022 Letter, E CF No. 397; 9/13/2022 Letter, ECF No. 409.) The requests to seal are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Accordingly, the parties shall meet and confer and, no later than September 30, 2022, file a renewed motion to seal, along with a revised version of ECF No. 394 that unredacts public information. The Court finds that the remaining redactions and/or sealing requests with respect to ECF Nos. 394-1 to 394-8, 405 and 405-1 to 405-6 are narrowly tailored to prevent unauthorized dissemination of co nfidential communications between Takeda and its legal counsel and, therefore, the Court grants the sealing request with respect to those documents. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 9/16/2022) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:13-cv-09244-RA-SDA et al. (ama)

Download PDF
Case 1:13-cv-09244-RA-SDA Document 413 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 9/16/2022 IN RE ACTOS ANTITRUST LITIGATION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: Master File No. 1:13-cv-09244 (RA) (SDA) ALL ACTIONS ORDER STEWART D. AARON, United States Magistrate Judge: Before the Court are requests to seal certain documents filed in connection with Plaintiffs’ August 30, 2022 Letter Motion (ECF Nos. 394) and Plaintiffs’ Reply in support of their Letter Motion (ECF Nos. 405). (See 9/1/2022 Letter, ECF No. 397; 9/13/2022 Letter, ECF No. 409.) The requests to seal are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation's history," this right is not absolute and courts "must balance competing considerations against" the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 11920 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commcns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”). The Court find that the proposed redactions to Plaintiff’s Letter Motion filed at ECF No. 394 are overbroad as they redact information that Defendants filed on the public docket. Accordingly, the parties shall meet and confer and, no later than September 30, 2022, file a renewed motion to seal, along with a revised version of ECF No. 394 that unredacts public Case 1:13-cv-09244-RA-SDA Document 413 Filed 09/16/22 Page 2 of 2 information. The Court finds that the remaining redactions and/or sealing requests with respect to ECF Nos. 394-1 to 394-8, 405 and 405-1 to 405-6 are narrowly tailored to prevent unauthorized dissemination of confidential communications between Takeda and its legal counsel and, therefore, the Court grants the sealing request with respect to those documents. SO ORDERED. DATED: New York, New York September 16, 2022 ______________________________ STEWART D. AARON United States Magistrate Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?