Thales Avionics, Inc. v. L3 Technologies, Inc.

Filing 52

ORDER granting 47 Letter Motion to Seal. Plaintiff's application is GRANTED. The confidential documents (ECF Nos. 48 and 50) shall remain under seal. The Court of the Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate ECF 47. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky on 2/5/2024) (jca)

Download PDF
Plaintiff's application is GRANTED. The confidential documents (ECF Nos. 48 and 50) shall remain under seal. The Court of the Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate ECF 47. Dated: February 5, 2024 New York, NY Case 1:24-cv-00112-JGK-RFT Document 47 Filed 02/02/24 Page 2 of 2 Hon. Robyn F. Tarnofsky, p. 2 of May 24, 2023 between Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s parent companies, which in turn provides that all documents subject to it should be kept “strictly confidential.” ECF No. 12-1 at 1-2. Finally, the portions of its Reply that Plaintiff moves to redact either describe the content of Exhibits 1-3, or contain information that Defendant considers confidential and commercially sensitive (ECF No. 32). Your Honor previously granted Defendant’s application to redact portions of Defendant’s Opposition that contained similar types of information. ECF No. 36. “Established factors and values that can outweigh the presumption of public access include . . . business secrecy . . . and privacy interests.” Valassis Commc’ns, Inc. v. News Corp., No. 17-CV-7378 (PKC), 2020 WL 2190708, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 5, 2020). Courts have granted motions to seal commercially sensitive information, which, if disclosed, could cause competitive harm. See, e.g., Rubik’s Brand Ltd. v. Flambeau, Inc., No. 17-CV-6559 (PGG) (KHP), 2021 WL 1085338, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2021) (granting motion to seal license agreements, invoices, and documents relating to marketing strategy); Tropical Sails Corp. v. Yext, Inc., No. 14 CIV. 7582, 2016 WL 1451548, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 12, 2016) (sealing exhibits that would cause defendant “competitive injury” if disclosed). Cf. United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1051 (2d Cir. 1995) (“Commercial competitors seeking an advantage over rivals need not be indulged in the name of monitoring the courts.”). Plaintiff has no objection to filing any of these documents publicly. However, given that Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 were produced as highly confidential, Exhibit 3 contains nonpublic financial information about Defendant’s business and is of a type that Defendant previously maintained to be confidential, and portions of Plaintiff’s Reply refer to those or other documents that have been filed under seal and information that has been redacted in previous filings in this action, Plaintiff respectfully asks that Your Honor provisionally grant this Motion until Defendant has an opportunity to be heard on whether any or all of the Confidential Documents should be kept under seal. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Your Honor enter an Order allowing Plaintiff to file the Confidential Documents under seal. Dated: New York, New York February 2, 2024 Respectfully submitted, cc: All Counsel of Record (via ECF) Mark E. McDonald

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?