Newson v. Prinston Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Filing 39

ORDER granting 37 Defendant's Consent Motion to Seal Document 36 Sealed Reply to Response to Motion, 35 Response in Opposition to Motion. Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Prinston's Motion to En force Settlement Agreement (Document No. 35), Prinston's Reply Brief in Support of It's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Document No. 36), and any additional briefing related to Defendants Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement, be f iled and remain under seal until otherwise ordered by the Court.The parties shall file publicly available redacted versions of Document Nos. 35 and 36 and any additional briefing related to Defendants Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement. Such docu ments shall only be redacted to the extent necessary to protect confidential settlement terms. Redacted versions of Document Nos. 35 and 36 shall be filed on or before April 14, 2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 4/7/20. (mga)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-CV-269-RJC-DCK
DERRICK NEWSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
PRINSTON PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Defendant’s Consent Motion To Seal
Plaintiff’s Response In Opposition To, Defendant’s Reply Brief In Support Of, And Any
Additional Briefing Related To Defendant’s Motion To Enforce Settlement Agreement”
(Document No. 37) filed April 7, 2020. This motion has been referred to the undersigned
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having
carefully considered the motion and the record, and noting no objection from Plaintiff’s counsel,
the undersigned will grant the motion.
A party who seeks to seal any pleading must comply with the Local Rules of this Court.
Local Civil Rule(“LCvR”) 6.1 provides in relevant part as follows:
LCvR. 6.1

SEALED FILINGS AND PUBLIC ACCESS.

(a)
Scope of Rule. To further openness in civil case
proceedings, there is a presumption under applicable common law
and the First Amendment that materials filed in this Court will be
filed unsealed. This Rule governs any party’s request to seal, or
otherwise restrict public access to, any materials filed with the Court
or used in connection with judicial decision-making. As used in this
Rule, “materials” includes pleadings and documents of any nature
and in any medium or format.
(b)

Filing under Seal. No materials may be filed under seal

except by Court order, pursuant to a statute, or in accordance with a
previously entered Rule 26(e) protective order.
(c)
Motion to Seal or Otherwise Restrict Public Access. A
party’s request to file materials under seal must be made by formal
motion, separate from the motion or other pleading sought to be
sealed, pursuant to LCvR 7.1. Such motion must be filed
electronically under the designation “Motion to Seal.” The motion
must set forth:
(1)
A non-confidential description of the
material sought to be sealed;
(2)
A statement indicating why sealing is
necessary and why there are no alternatives to filing
under seal;
(3)
Unless permanent sealing is sought, a
statement indicating how long the party seeks to have
the material maintained under seal and how the
matter is to be handled upon unsealing; and
(4)
Supporting statutes, case law, or other
authority.
Local Rule 6.1. It appears that the requirements of Local Rule 6.1(c)(1) through (4) have been
adequately met.
Having considered the factors provided in Local Rule 6.1(c), the Court will grant the
motion to seal. However, the Court will also require the parties to file publicly available redacted
versions of the documents they seek to seal.
Noting that the time for public response has not run to this motion, the Court will consider
any objection to this Order from non-parties as an objection to the motion, requiring no additional
burden for any non-party under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Local Rule 6.1(e).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Defendant’s Consent Motion To Seal Plaintiff’s
Response In Opposition To, Defendant’s Reply Brief In Support Of, And Any Additional Briefing
Related To Defendant’s Motion To Enforce Settlement Agreement” (Document No. 37) is
GRANTED.

2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Plaintiff’s Response In Opposition To Prinston’s
Motion To Enforce Settlement Agreement” (Document No. 35), “Prinston’s Reply Brief In
Support Of Its Motion To Enforce Settlement Agreement” (Document No. 36), and any additional
briefing related to Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement, be filed and remain
under seal until otherwise ordered by the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file publicly available redacted
versions of Document Nos. 35 and 36 and any additional briefing related to Defendant’s Motion
to Enforce Settlement Agreement. Such documents shall only be redacted to the extent necessary
to protect confidential settlement terms. Redacted versions of Document Nos. 35 and 36 shall be
filed on or before April 14, 2020.
SO ORDERED.

Signed: April 7, 2020

3