CATHY L. WALDOR, Magistrate Judge.
1. The Confidential Material discloses VistaPharm's proprietary filing information concerning the product that is subject of VistaPharm's Abbreviated New Drug Application ("ANDA"), which is information confidential to VistaPharm and not otherwise disclosed to the public.
2. This is a complex pharmaceutical patent infringement action. As such a significant portion of the materials exchanged in discovery, and subsequently filed with the Court in connection with pretrial proceedings, contain the Parties' proprietary and confidential research, development and business information. The material identified herein contains information the Parties have designated as "Confidential" or "Highly Confidential," including its trade secrets, confidential research, and/or commercial information.
3. By designating this information "Confidential" or "Highly Confidential," it is apparent that the Parties have indicated that the public disclosure of this information would be detrimental to their business. Due to the nature of the materials herein, there is no less restrictive alternative to sealing portions of the Confidential Material.
4. The Parties' request is narrowly tailored to only the confidential information contained in the above materials. In this regard, the Parties are permitted to file a redacted, nonconfidential version of the subject materials.
5. Upon consideration of the papers submitted in support of the motion, and the information that the Parties have designated as "Confidential" and/or "Highly Confidential," the Court concludes that Sun and VistaPharm have met their burden of proving under Local Civil Rule 5.3 and applicable case law that the information described above should be sealed. Specifically, the Court concludes that: (a) the materials contain confidential information concerning Sun and VistaPharm's businesses; (b) Sun and VistaPharm have a legitimate interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the information to protect its disclosure to potential competitors who could use the information contained therein to develop and market competing products; (c) public disclosure of the confidential information would result in clearly defined and serious injury, including the use of the confidential information by competitors to Sun and VistaPharm's financial detriment; and (d) no less restrictive alternative to sealing the subject information is available.
6. The foregoing conclusions are supported by relevant case law holding that the right of public access to the full court transcript is not absolute, and may be overcome by a showing, such as made here, in the discretion of the trial court. See Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 603 (1978). The Court, upon such a proper showing, may, in its discretion, prevent confidential information from being "transmuted into materials presumptively subject to public access." Gambale v. Deutsche Bank AG, 377 F.3d 133, 143 n.8 (2d Cir. 2004).