In re ACTOS 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, ECF 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 confidential 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)

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