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

Filing 288

ORDER granting 283 Letter Motion to Seal. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff is GRANTED permission to file its licensing and assignment agreement under seal. Although "[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firml y rooted in our nations 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 quotatio n 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 information related to Plaintiff. The parties are advised that the Cour t 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.. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/4/2021) (jca)

Case 1:18-cv-02318-LGS-BCM Document 288 Filed 03/04/21 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------JOINT STOCK COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

-againstRUSSIAN TV COMPANY INC., et al.,
Defendants.
------------------------------------------------------------

X
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
X

18 Civ. 2318 (LGS)
ORDER

WHEREAS, on March 3, 2021, Plaintiff filed a letter renewing its prior “request to file its licensing and
assignment agreement with non-party Kartina . . . under seal at the level of ‘Selected Parties’.” Dkt. No. 283. It
is hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff is GRANTED permission to file its licensing and assignment agreement under
seal. 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 information related to Plaintiff.
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: March 4, 2021
New York, New York