Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company et al

Filing 427

ORDER granting 423 Letter Motion to Seal. APPLICATION GRANTED SO ORDERED. Defendants are directed to Rule 5.B. of my Individual Rules & Practices in Civil Cases and to meet and confer with Plaintiff as necessary to determine if the written responses can be filed in redacted form on ECF. (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 3/21/2022) (jca)

March 18, 2022
VIA ECF
Hon. Vernon S. Broderick
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square, Room 415
New York, New York 10007

03/21/22
Defendants are directed to Rule 5.B. of my Individual
Rules & Practices in Civil Cases and to meet and confer
with Plaintiff as necessary to determine if the written
responses can be filed in redacted form on ECF.

Re: Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company, et al.,
Case No.: 18-cv-11386 (VSB)
Dear Judge Broderick:
We represent Defendants in the above-referenced action. We write pursuant to Rule 5.B of
Your Honor’s Individual Practices in Civil Cases to respectfully request permission to file under
seal Defendants’ Written Responses to the Court’s Questions Set Forth in the March 9, 2022 Sealed
Order (Dkt. 417) and Exhibits B to E to the Declaration of Marla R. Butler in Support of
Defendants’ Written Responses to the Court’s Questions Set Forth in the March 9, 2022 Sealed
Order (Dkt. 417), which are being filed today, March 18, 2022, and contain information the parties
have designated Highly Confidential or Confidential under the parties’ Stipulated Confidentiality
and Protective Order (the “Protective Order”) (Dkt. 156).
The presumption of public access to judicial documents can be overcome if countervailing
factors warrant confidentiality. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d
Cir. 2006); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). Sealing of records
may be justified to preserve “higher values,” including the need to protect an entity from
competitive injury. Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 124; see also Tropical Sails Corp. v. Yext, Inc., No. 14cv-7582, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49029, at *10-11 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 12) (risk of “competitive injury
is sufficiently serious to warrant protection” of proprietary business information). Consistent with
this, courts routinely permit sealing and redaction of competitively sensitive proprietary business
information or information subject to a claim of privilege. See, e.g., Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A.
v. Sunny Merch. Corp., 97 F. Supp. 3d 485, 511 (S.D.N.Y. 2015); Encyclopedia Brown Prods.,
Ltd. v. Home Box Office. Inc., 26 F. Supp. 2d 606, 614 (S.D.N.Y. 1998); see also Nixon, 435 U.S.
at 598 (recognizing need to seal information that might “harm a litigant’s competitive standing”).
Here, Defendants’ Written Responses to the Court’s Questions Set Forth in the March 9,
2022 Sealed Order (Dkt. 417) and the exhibits referenced above contain references to information
that is assertedly competitively sensitive and proprietary information of one or both parties and, if
disclosed, could pose a substantial risk of harm. This is the sort of sensitive information that courts
consistently protect from disclosure. See, e.g., Ferring B.V. v. Allergan, Inc., No. 12-cv-2650, 2017
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150239, at *16 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 7) (sealing documents containing proprietary

[e-mail] Fax: [phone] Phone: [phone]

Page 2

information); Encyclopedia Brown, 26 F. Supp. 2d at 612 (sealing documents reflecting sensitive
trade secret information).
For these reasons, Defendants respectfully request permission to file under seal
Defendants’ Written Responses to the Court’s Questions Set Forth in the March 9, 2022 Sealed
Order (Dkt. 417) and Exhibits B to E to the Declaration of Marla R. Butler in Support of
Defendants’ Written Responses to the Court’s Questions Set Forth in the March 9, 2022 Sealed
Order (Dkt. 417).
Very truly yours,
/s/ Marla R. Butler
THOMPSON HINE LLP
Marla R. Butler
Two Alliance Center
3560 Lenox Road NE, Suite 1600
Atlanta, Georgia 30326
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Brian Lanciault
335 Madison Avenue, 12th Floor
New York, New York 10017
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
General Electric Company, GE Healthcare,
Inc., GE Medical Systems Israel Ltd., JeanPaul Bouhnik, Sergio Steinfeld,
Arie Eshco, and Nathan Hermony and for NonParty Yaron Hefetz
cc: All Counsel of Record via ECF

Jesse Jenike-Godshalk (pro hac vice)
312 Walnut Street, Suite 2000
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Tel.: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

Jeffrey Metzcar
Discovery Place
10050 Innovation Drive
Miamisburg, Ohio 45342
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]