DUCTMATE INDUSTRIES, INC. v. FAMOUS DISTRIBUTION, INC. et al

Filing 87

ORDER OF COURT ADOPTING 81 SPECIAL MASTER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 63 Plaintiff's Motion to Remove the Improper Designation of "Confidential Information" from the Deposition of William R. Gray; and GRANTING 85 Defendant's Motion for Order that Special Master not Bill Defendants for His Work on the Discrete Issue Concerning Plaintiff's Dispute with Third-Party William R. Gray Regarding Confidentiality Designations. See Order for further details. Signed by Judge Arthur J. Schwab on 1/10/2014. (lcb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DUCTMATE INDUSTRIES,INC,
Plaintiff,

12cv1440
ELECTRONICALLY FILED

v.
FAMOUS DISTRIBUTION, INC,
FAMOUS INDUSTRIES, INC.,
Defendant.
ORDER OF COURT ADOPTING SPECIAL MASTER’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION (DOC. NO. 81) RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMOVE THE
IMPROPER DESIGNATION OF “CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION” FROM THE
DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM R. GRAY (DOC. NO. 63); GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION (DOC. NO. 63) AND GRANTING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ORDER THAT SPECIAL MASTER NOT BILL
DEFENDANTS FOR HIS WORK ON THE DISCRETE ISSUE CONCERNING
PLAINTIFF’S DISPUTE WITH THIRD-PARTY WILLIAM R. GRAY REGARDING
CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS (DOC. NO. 85)
On December 12, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remove the Improper Designation of
“Confidential Information” from the Deposition of William R. Gray. Doc. No. 63. Plaintiff
moved the Court to find that other than certain portions of Mr. Gray’s deposition testimony are
public information. Id. Mr. Gray is the President of Gray Flex Systems, Inc. and Snap Rite
Manufacturing, Inc. and, like these companies, is not a party in this patent litigation matter. See
Doc. No. 81, 2. The Court referred Plaintiff’s Motion to Special Master John McIlvaine without
elaboration of how costs would be allocated. Text Order 12/13/2013.
After briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion re. William R. Gray by “interested non-party” Mr.
Gray and Plaintiff, the Special Master filed his Report and Recommendation that recommended
to this Court that Plaintiff’s Motion be granted in part and denied in part. Both Plaintiff and Mr.
Gray have filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Doc. Nos. 83 and 84.

Defendant did not file any documents in relation to Plaintiff’s Motion. After consideration of the
Report and Recommendation and objections thereto, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the
Special Master’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 81) is ADOPTED AS THE
OPINION OF THE COURT in this matter.
As such, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff’s Motion to Remove the Improper
Designation of “Confidential Information” from the Deposition of William R. Gray is
GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The excerpts of the September 23, 2013
deposition transcript of William R. Gray identified in the chart set forth in Section B of the
Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 81, 7-8) be designated as “Confidential Information”
pursuant to the Protective Order, and all other information be de-designated as confidential under
any level of protection available under the Protective Order.
Also pending before this Court is Defendant’s Motion for Order that Special Master Not
Bill Defendants for his Work on the Discrete Issue Concerning Plaintiff’s Dispute with ThirdParty Confidentiality Designations. Doc. No. 85. Defendant notes that Plaintiff agrees that
Defendant should not be charged for the costs associated with its Motion. IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED THAT Defendant’s Motion for Order that Special Master Not Bill Defendants for
His Work on the Discrete Issue Concerning Plaintiff’s Dispute with Third-Party William R. Gray
Regarding Confidentiality Designations (Doc. No. 85) is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED, this 10th day of January, 2014,
s/ Arthur J. Schwab
Arthur J. Schwab
United States District Judge
cc:

All Registered ECF Counsel and Parties

2