Easy Spirit, LLC v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc. et al

Filing 90

ORDER granting 86 Letter Motion to Seal. Having reviewed the proposed redactions, this Court finds that they are narrowly tailored, limited in scope, and justified to protect confidential and proprietary business information. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006). Accordingly, Skechers' motion to file under seal is granted. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 10/13/2020) (kv)

Case 1:19-cv-03299-WHP Document 90 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 2

One Atlantic Center
1201 West Peachtree Street
Atlanta, GA 30309-3424
404-881-7000 | Fax: [phone]

Robert L. Lee

Direct Dial: 404-881-7635

Email: [e-mail]

Having reviewed the proposed redactions, this Court finds that they are narrowly
October 8, 2020 tailored, limited in scope, and justified to protect confidential and proprietary
business information. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110,
VIA ECF1
120 (2d Cir. 2006). Accordingly, Skechers' motion to file under seal is granted.
Honorable William H. Pauley III
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Dated: October 13, 2020
United States Courthouse
New York, New York
500 Pearl Street, Room 1920
New York, New York 10007
Re:

Easy Spirit, LLC v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II,
No. 1:19-cv-03299 (WHP) – Request to File Under Seal

Dear Judge Pauley:
Pursuant to Your Honor’s Individual Rule V(B), Defendants Skechers U.S.A.,
Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II (“Skechers”) respectfully request to file under seal the
following documents:


Defendants Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II’s Reply to Plaintiff
Easy Spirit, LLC’s Counterstatement of Additional Material Facts.

“It is beyond question that a court may issue orders prohibiting disclosure of
documents or information.” F.D.I.C. v. Ernst & Ernst, 677 F.2d 230, 232 (2d Cir. 1982).
Once the parties have relied on a confidentiality order issued by the court, the court
should modify it only under an “‘extraordinary circumstance’ or ‘compelling need.’” Id.
(quoting Martindell v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., 594 F.2d 291, 296
(2d Cir. 1979)).
Your Honor has previously approved the filing of Plaintiff’s Counter Statement of
Facts under seal (Dkt. No. 82). Skechers’ request is limited to filing under seal the same
confidential information previously filed under seal as it is repeated in Skechers’ Reply.
In accordance with the Stipulated Protective Order (Dkt. No. 23) ¶ 7, Skechers, therefore,
requests that the above-listed document be filed partially under seal.

1

Per Covid-19 Emergency Rule 2(C), Skechers will refrain from sending courtesy copies to Chambers.

Alston & Bird LLP

www.alston.com

Atlanta | Beijing | Brussels | Charlotte | Dallas | London | Los Angeles | New York | Raleigh | San Francisco | Silicon Valley | Washington, D.C.

Case 1:19-cv-03299-WHP Document 90 Filed 10/13/20 Page 2 of 2
Page 2
Respectfully submitted,
By:

s/ Robert L. Lee
Robert L. Lee (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Emily C. Welch(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
Michelle W. Wilco (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
1201 West Peachtree St. NW
Atlanta, GA 30309-3424
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Andrew J. Ligotti
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
90 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10016
Tel: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants Skechers U.S.A.,
Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II

cc:

Counsel of Record via ECF