Health & Beauty Technologies, Inc et al v. Merz Pharma GmbH KgaA et al

Filing 214

ORDER granting 212 Motion to Seal 209 PROPOSED SEALED Response, exhibits 209-2 through 209-6. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr on 7/22/2019. (Collins, S.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
No. 7:18-CV-00117-FL

HEALTH & BEAUTY TECHNOLOGIES , INC.,
and MEDI-BUILD INTERNATIONAL CORP.,
Plaintiffs,

ORDER

V.

MERZ PHARMA GmbH KGAA, and MERZ
NORTH AMERICA, INC. ,
Defendants.

This matter is before the Court upon the unopposed Motion to Seal Exh ibits 209-2
through 209-6 of Plaintiffs ' Response to Defendants ' Motion for Protective Order and
Request for Expedited Response Deadline (D.E. 209).
lt appearing to the Court, after considering the Motion to Seal, (i) that the Motion to Seal
has been timely filed; (ii) that the granting of the Motion to Seal will not cause any undue delay or
prejudice to any other parties; (iii) that granting the Motion to Seal will facilitate the efficient
administration of justice; and (iv) that, for good cause shown, the Motion to Seal shou ld be granted.
ln reaching this determination, the Court (i) notes that public notice of the request to seal
has been provided, and interested parties have been allowed a reasonable opportunity to object,
(ii) has considered less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) is providi ng specific
reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents. Specifically, it appears
that the documents in question relate to highl y sensitive mergers and acquisition work, including
diligence, pricing, margins, and other corporate decisions. The pharmaceutical industry is

No. 7: 18-CV-00 117-FL
extremely competitive. If these documents were to be made public, it could allow competitors to
observe how Defendants determine acquisition targets and conduct diligence on those targets. This
could be detrimental to Defendants ' business practice, and this is the very reason why a Consent
Protective Order was entered in the first place. For these reasons, maintaining the exhibits under
seal outweighs the public 's right to access the documents.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Defendants'
Motion to Seal Exhibits 209-2 through 209-6 of Plaintiffs ' Response to Defendants' Motion for
Protective Order and Request for Expedited Response Deadline (D.E. 209) should be, and hereby
is, granted, and Exhibits 209-2 through 209-6 of Exhibits 209-2 through 209-6 of Plaintiffs'
Response to Defendants ' Motion for Protective Order and Request for Expedited Response
Deadline (D .E. 209) will remain sealed.
SO ORDERED, this 22nd day of July, 2019.

United States Magistrate Judge

2