Filed: Mar. 01, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2019
Summary: Order PATRICIA D. BARKSDALE , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Lanard Toys Limited's motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 374, the defendants' response in opposition, Doc. 381, and the defendants' unopposed motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 375. The standards for sealing are in the Court's June 30, 2016, order and incorporated here, Doc. 189 at 1-3, with this addition: "It is immaterial whether the sealing of the record is an integral part of a negotiated settle
Summary: Order PATRICIA D. BARKSDALE , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Lanard Toys Limited's motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 374, the defendants' response in opposition, Doc. 381, and the defendants' unopposed motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 375. The standards for sealing are in the Court's June 30, 2016, order and incorporated here, Doc. 189 at 1-3, with this addition: "It is immaterial whether the sealing of the record is an integral part of a negotiated settlem..
More
Order
PATRICIA D. BARKSDALE, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is Lanard Toys Limited's motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 374, the defendants' response in opposition, Doc. 381, and the defendants' unopposed motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 375.
The standards for sealing are in the Court's June 30, 2016, order and incorporated here, Doc. 189 at 1-3, with this addition: "It is immaterial whether the sealing of the record is an integral part of a negotiated settlement between the parties[.]" Brown v. Advantage Eng'g, Inc., 960 F.2d 1013, 1016 (11th Cir. 1992).
The defendants seek to maintain under seal customer identities, internal cost information, and profit margins. Doc. 375. They have overcome the presumption of public access. The Court previously found a list of companies to whom Ja-Ru sold the Ja-Ru chalk pencil is a trade secret. See Doc. 248. The costs and profit margins are not publicly known, and their disclosure could provide a competitive advantage to others. The information concerns no public official or public issue. The defendants have narrowly tailored the requested relief, and no less restrictive alternative appears available. The Court grants the defendants' unopposed motion to maintain documents under seal, Doc. 375, to the extent the following information may remain under seal.1 As requested by the defendants, the seal will remain in effect until August 31, 2020. The defendants are cautioned that some of the information could be disclosed earlier in orders or at trial.
Doc. Description Page:Line or Bates
Transcript of depo. of Russell 136:7, 18, 21
362 at 3 Selevan, Vol. II 137:2, 7, 13-14, 17, 23
138:1, 3, 22-24
Transcript of depo. of Russell
362-1 at 1-2 Selevan, ex. 41 JR000001-JR000002
Transcript of depo. of Russell
380 at 1-164 Selevan, ex. 116 JR000003-JR000163
95:18, 20, 22
96:7-8
363 at 25-26, Transcript of depo. of Marc 97:4, 7-8, 10, 14, 17
29, 33, 35, 37, Selevan 98:1
40, 41
Customer names in word index and
transcript
Transcript of depo. of Eric
361-2 at 1 Hedberg, ex. 20 DG000002 (cost information only)
Transcript of depo. of Eric
361-3 at 1 Hedberg, ex. 32 DG000055 (cost information only)
Transcript of depo. of Colleen
364 at 37 Cosgrove 143:12
Transcript of depo. of Colleen T000027-T000034 (landed cost information
364-12 at 1-8 Cosgrove, ex. 12 only)
Lanard's motion for summary
326-6 at 2 judgment, ex. L DG000055 (cost information only)
Lanard's motion for summary
326-9 at 2-3 judgment, ex. V JR000001-JR000002
Defendants' opposition to
Lanard's motion for summary
325-3 at 2-3 judgment, ex. C to Lewis JR000001-JR000002
Anten's declaration
Lanard's opposition to
327-6 at 2 defendants' motion for DG000055 (cost information only)
summary judgment, ex. L
Defendants' Daubert motion
319-1 at 46, 47 re Kerr, ex. A (exs. 6.1 and 6.2
to report)
Lanard's opposition to
379-3 at 46, 47 defendants' Daubert motion re
Kerr, ex. B (exs. 6.1 and 6.2 to
report)
Lanard's Daubert motion re
376-3 at 46, 47 Mard, ex. B (exs. 6.1 and 6.2 to
report)
Lanard also seeks to maintain documents under seal. Doc. 374 at 6-13. Lanard has not overcome the presumption of public access. Lanard fails to explain the reasons why the documents must be sealed beyond placing them in broad categories (for example, "Trade Secret Product Development and Trade Secret Product Sales Information") and does not narrowly tailor its request. Except for any information allowed to remain under seal through the defendants' motion, the Court denies Lanard's motion, Doc. 374, without prejudice to filing a motion that provides the information necessary to balance the public's right of access against the parties' interest in confidentiality. See Doc. 189. Any such motion must be filed by March 15, 2019, and include a certificate required by Local Rule 3.01(g).2
After considering any such motion and any response, the Court will direct the clerk to make available to the public all documents and information not expressly allowed by the Court to remain under seal, as well as all redacted versions of documents allowed by this order. For now, the Court directs the clerk to unseal the following documents because no party seeks to maintain them under seal or the seal has expired: (1) all parts of the deposition transcript of Marc Dubner, Docs. S-365-S365-1; and (2) the deposition transcript of Angela Ku, Docs. S-367-S-367-62.
Ordered in Jacksonville, Florida, on March 1, 2019.
