Rinaldi v. SCA La Goutte, D'Or et al

Filing 237

ORDER granting 234 Letter Motion to Seal. APPLICATION GRANTED. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 3/14/2022) (ks)

Case 1:16-cv-01901-VSB-SDA Document 237 Filed 03/14/22 Page 1 of 3

LETTER MOTION VIA CM/ECF – Schedule A Redacted
Honorable Vernon S. Broderick
United States District Court
Southern District Court
Southern District of New York
40 Foley Square, Room 415
New York, New York 10017
03/14/22
March 11, 2022
Nicholas Paine
Of Counsel | Attorney at Law
[e-mail]
mobile: [phone]

RE: Rinaldi v. SCA La Goutte 1:16-cv-01901 (VSB)
Dear Judge Broderick:
Our Firm represents Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiffs SCA La Goutte
D’Or and SAS Ch. & A. Prieur in the above referenced matter. In accordance
with the Court’s docket entry of January 21, 2022 (Dkt. 189), as well as the
Court’s Order extending the Redaction Request submission date to March
11, 2022 (Dkt. 209), La Goutte and Prieur hereby respectfully request that
certain parts of the transcript of the January 21, 2022, conference (Dkt. 189)
(the “Transcript”) be redacted when published on the public docket.
The requested redactions to the Transcript, which are set out in Schedule A
hereto (a redacted/marked copy of the Transcript can be provided upon the
Court’s request) (the “Redactions”), reference certain personal information
as it relates to submissions regarding a witness’ remote testimony at trial
from France. Counsel for Plaintiff has indicated they have no objection to
Schedule A being filed redacted/under seal in conjunction with this redaction
request.
In accordance with this Court’s instructions during the January 21, 2022,
hearing, the Parties subsequently submitted filings regarding remote testimony at trial, including documents concerning the same personal information that is sought to be redacted in the Transcript now. (e.g. Dkts. 185
& 186). Those were filed redacted/filed under seal. See id. The request for

Zeiler Floyd Zadkovich (US) LLP 
215 Park Avenue South, 11th floor, New York, NY, 10003 USA
Zeiler Floyd Zadkovich (US) LLP is a limited liability partnership established in the State of New York,
advising only on laws of the United States of America. Zeiler Floyd Zadkovich (US) LLP is a member
firm of Zeiler Floyd Zadkovich (a Swiss Verein). Each member of the Swiss Verein is separately insured
and practices law independently of other member firms.
The Swiss Verein does not provide any legal services.

Case 1:16-cv-01901-VSB-SDA Document 237 Filed 03/14/22 Page 2 of 3

redactions/sealing of the documents containing the personal information was subsequently
granted by this Court. (Dkt. 187).
While there is a common law right to public access to judicial documents, that right is not
absolute. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-120 (2d Cir. 2006). This
presumption may be overcome “if a sufficiently compelling countervailing interest is demonstrated.” Id. at 120. Under certain circumstances, “the privacy interest of the person resisting
disclosure can be sufficient to overcome the public right to access.” U.S. v. King, 10-cr-122
(JGK) 2021 WL 2196674, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 15, 2012). However, such exceptions, “should
be based on a particularized showing of need, and any redactions would be required to be
narrowly tailored to accomplish the overriding interest.” Id. (citations omitted).
Here, the Redactions concern information that is not known to the public. The Redactions do
not concern public health or safety, do not involve a public entity or official, and are not at the
heart of what the parties have asked. As such, any interest that the public would have in the
Redactions is accordingly minimal.
Conversely, the right to maintain the confidentiality of personal information not known to the
public falls well within the range of “higher value” that trumps hypothetical public interest in
accessing the redactions in the Transcript. See Gardner v. Newsday, Inc. (In re Newsday, Inc.),
895 F.2d 74, 79-80 (2d Cir. 1990) (stating that “[w]e have previously held that the privacy
interest of innocent third parties … should weigh heavily in a court’s balancing equation”)
(internal quotations omitted).
Further, the Transcript concerns a conference regarding the remote testimony of a witness from
France, not a full trial on the merits. The Redactions do not relate to the underlying claims in
this action but seek redaction of personal information of a witness. Moreover, as noted above,
the Court has previously ordered documents that included the personal information remain
redacted and sealed. The limited requests for redaction of the Transcript concern portions of
the Transcript addressing the same information as those previously redacted and sealed documents.
As such, good cause exists to justify redacting the Transcript to preserve the confidentiality of
personal information. The Redactions are narrowly tailored to protect confidential personal
information pertaining to a witness in this action and to prevent the unauthorized dissemination

2 | 3

Case 1:16-cv-01901-VSB-SDA Document 237 Filed 03/14/22 Page 3 of 3

of personal data subject to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (the “General Data Protection Regulation” or “GDPR”), as well as to protect the privacy of interest of the relevant witness. See
Allianz Global, 2021 WL 211544, 8-cv-10364, 2021 WL 211544, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21,
2021). It is respectfully submitted that no interest will be prejudiced by the requested redactions. Indeed, the redactions do not contain information that concerns matters of public interest.
Wherefore, La Goutte and Prieur respectfully request that this Court issue an Order directing
that the Transcript be redacted in accordance with the requested redactions attached as Schedule A hereto. Further, La Goutte and Prieur respectfully request that the Court order that only
the redacted version of the Transcript be made available on the public docket.
We thank the Court for its consideration.
Best Regards,
/s/ Nicholas W. Paine
Nicholas W. Paine
CC: All counsel of record via CM/ECF

3 | 3