Peerless Network, Inc. et al v. AT&T Corp.

Filing 246

ORDER granting 242 Letter Motion to Seal. For the reasons stated at Dkt. No. 212, the proposed redactions to the Decision & Order dated April 11, 2023 (Dkt. No. 240) are approved. The parties are directed to file the redacted version of the Decision & Order by Friday, April 26, 2023. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Victor Marrero on 4/26/2023) (jca)

Case 1:15-cv-00870-VM-VF Document 246 Filed 04/26/23 Page 1 of 2
NEW YORK

SHANGHAI

LONDON

ATLANTA

SINGAPORE

BALTIMORE
FIRM and AFFILIATE OFFICES

PHILADELPHIA

WILMINGTON

CHICAGO

MIAMI

WASHINGTON, DC

BOCA RATON

SAN FRANCISCO

PITTSBURGH

BRIAN A. MCALEENAN
DIRECT DIAL: [phone]
E-MAIL: [e-mail]

SILICON VALLEY
SAN DIEGO
LOS ANGELES
BOSTON

NEWARK
LAS VEGAS
CHERRY HILL
LAKE TAHOE

www.duanemorris.com

HOUSTON

MYANMAR

DALLAS
AUSTIN

ALLIANCES IN MEXICO

HANOI

AND SRI LANKA

HO CHI MINH CITY

For the reasons stated at Dkt. No. 212, the
proposed redactions to the Decision & Order
dated April 11, 2023 (Dkt. No. 240) are
approved. The parties are directed to file the
redacted version of the Decision & Order by
Friday, April 26, 2023.

April 24, 2023
BY ECF
The Hon. Victor Marrero
United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007-1312
Re:

4/26/2023

In re Peerless Networks, Inc. v. AT&T Corp.,
Civil Action No. 15-CV-870 (VM)(VF)
4/26/2023

Dear Judge Marrero:

We write on behalf of AT&T Corp., in response to the Court’s Decision and Order dated
April 11, 2023, which (a) overruled Peerless Networks, Inc.’s objections to Magistrate Judge
Figueredo’s January 31, 2023 Report and Recommendation; (b) denied Peerless Network, Inc.’s
March 11, 2022 Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement; and (c) directed the parties to submit,
by April 24, 2023, any proposed redactions to said Decision and Order. (D.E. 240) We have
consulted with counsel for Peerless Network, Inc., and, with counsel’s consent, we respectfully
write to jointly request redactions of certain items from the Decision and Order pursuant to, and
consistent with, prior Orders entered in this case respecting the confidentiality of materials.
(D.E. 28 ¶ 7; D.E. 125 at 2 n.1; D.E. 130; D.E. 212; D.E. 219; D.E. 230; D.E. 233.)
In particular, enclosed herewith are copies of the Decision and Order with proposed
redactions of certain words on pages 2-10 and 14-19 of the Decision and Order. The intent of
each proposed redaction is to conceal from the public record certain confidential provisions of
the confidential settlement agreement at issue in these post-judgment proceedings as well as
confidential aspects of the parties’ respective businesses, including sensitive pricing terms and
AT&T’s business dealings with other third-party providers. As previously reported to the Court,
these confidential settlement provisions and business terms reflect and embody highly-sensitive
business data, the disclosure of which to third-party competitors could be detrimental to the
parties’ business. (See, e.g., D.E. 196 at 2.) By contrast, the public can still gain a robust
understanding of the legal issues discussed in the Decision and Order based on the un-redacted
terms.
D UANE M ORRIS LLP
190 SOUTH LASALLE STREET, SUITE 3700

CHICAGO, IL 60603-3433

PHONE: [phone]

FAX: [phone]

Case 1:15-cv-00870-VM-VF Document 246 Filed 04/26/23 Page 2 of 2

District Judge Victor Marrero
April 24, 2023
Page 2
For the foregoing reasons, the parties respectfully request that the Court make available
to the public a copy of the enclosed, redacted the Decision and Order or, alternatively, a similar
copy of the Decision and Order reflecting the same proposed redactions.
We thank the Court for its consideration of this matter and are available to address any
questions the Court might have
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Brian A. McAleenan
Brian A. McAleenan
cc:
Counsel of Record (via ECF)
Encl.