Joint Stock Company "Channel One Russia Worldwide" v. Russian TV Company Inc. et al

Filing 279

ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the parties and Kartina are GRANTED permission to file exhibits under seal as listed in the appendix at Dkt. No. 277. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff Joint Stock Companys request to file its licensing agreeme nt with Kartina at CHANNELONERTV000543-568 under seal is DENIED without prejudice to renewal. By March 1, 2021, Plaintiff shall file a letter indicating whether it renews its request. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 2/22/2021) (cf)

Case 1:18-cv-02318-LGS-BCM Document 279 Filed 02/22/21 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------------X
:
JOINT STOCK COMPANY,
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
:
-against:
:
RUSSIAN TV COMPANY INC., et al.,
Defendants. :
------------------------------------------------------------ X

18 Civ. 2318 (LGS)
ORDER

WHEREAS, on January 29, 2021, Defendants filed a letter requesting permission to “file
certain exhibits related to Defendants’ Summary-Trial Memorandum in redacted form and under
seal” and took no position on exhibits designated as confidential by Plaintiff and non-party
Kartina Digital GmbH (“Kartina”). Dkt. No. 269.
WHEREAS, on February 8, 2021, Plaintiff and non-party Kartina filed a letter dedesignating certain documents as confidential and consenting to or taking no position on
Defendant’s and Kartina’s exhibits designated as confidential by Defendant and Kartina
respectively. Dkt. No. 275. It is hereby
ORDERED that the parties and Kartina are GRANTED permission to file exhibits under
seal as listed in the appendix at Dkt. No. 277. 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, 119–20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see
also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns., 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.”). Filing the above-referenced documents
in redacted form is necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential

Case 1:18-cv-02318-LGS-BCM Document 279 Filed 02/22/21 Page 2 of 4

information related to parties and Kartina. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff Joint Stock Company’s request to file its licensing agreement
with Kartina at CHANNELONERTV000543-568 under seal is DENIED without prejudice to
renewal. By March 1, 2021, Plaintiff shall file a letter indicating whether it renews its request.
Plaintiff shall specify which docket number its licensing agreement is filed under. If Plaintiff has
not filed its licensing agreement on the docket, Plaintiff shall file its licensing agreement on the
docket under seal, subject to possible unsealing upon the Court’s review of the docket. Plaintiff
shall file any other of its exhibits not on the docket in accordance with the Court’s Individual
Rules, especially Rule I.D.3.
The parties are advised that the Court retains unfettered discretion whether or not to afford
confidential treatment to any Confidential Document or information contained in any Confidential
Document submitted to the Court in connection with any motion, application, or proceeding that
may result in an order and/or decision by the Court.
Dated: February 22, 2021
New York, New York

Case 1:18-cv-02318-LGS-BCM Document 277 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 2
279
02/22/21
3 4

February 16, 2021
VIA ECF
Hon. Lorna G. Schofield
United States District Judge
Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse
40 Centre Street, Courtroom 1106
New York, New York 10007
Re:

Joint Stock Company “Channel One Russia Worldwide v.
Russian TV Company, Inc., et al., Case No. 18-cv-2318 (LGS)

Dear Judge Schofield:
We represent Defendants in the above-referenced action and we write jointly with
Plaintiff under Section I.D.3 of the Court’s Individual Rules and under the Court’s February 10,
2020, directive (Dkt. No. 276) to provide an Appendix identifying all parties and attorneys of
record who should have access to the sealed documents filed in connection with Defendants’
Summary-Trial Memorandum (see Dkt. Nos. 270-73).
APPENDIX FOR ACCESS TO SEALED DOCUMENTS
Plaintiff’s and non-party Kartina Digital GmbH’s Confidential Documents
Dkt. Nos.
273-13

Access
Parties: Plaintiff, Defendants, Kartina Digital GmbH (“Kartina”)
Counsel for Plaintiff: Raymond Dowd, Hardin Rowley, Kamanta Kettle, Samuel
Blaustein
Counsel for Defendants: Lindsay Hogan, Judd Grossman
Counsel for Kartina: Raymond Dowd, Hardin Rowley, Samuel Blaustein

273-7

Designation and sealing request withdrawn (see Dkt. No. 275)

273-2
273-3
273-4
273-5
273-8
273-12

Parties: Kartina, Defendants
Counsel for Plaintiff: Raymond Dowd, Hardin Rowley, Kamanta Kettle, Samuel
Blaustein
Counsel for Defendants: Lindsay Hogan, Judd Grossman
Counsel for Kartina: Raymond Dowd, Hardin Rowley, Samuel Blaustein

Case 1:18-cv-02318-LGS-BCM Document 277 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 2
279
02/22/21
4 4

Hon. Lorna G. Schofield
February 16, 2021

Page 2 of 2

APPENDIX FOR ACCESS TO SEALED DOCUMENTS
Defendants’ Confidential Documents
Dkt. No.
272-4
272-10

Access
Parties: Plaintiff and Defendants
Counsel for Plaintiff: Raymond Dowd, Hardin Rowley, Kamanta Kettle, Samuel
Blaustein
Counsel for Defendants: Lindsay Hogan, Judd Grossman

272-11

Parties: Defendants
Counsel for Plaintiff: Raymond Dowd, Hardin Rowley, Kamanta Kettle, Samuel
Blaustein
Counsel for Defendants: Lindsay Hogan, Judd Grossman
Respectfully submitted,

Lindsay E. Hogan
cc:

All counsel of record (via ECF)