Sportvision, Inc v. MLB Advanced Media L.P.
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:18-cv-03025
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Sportvision v. MLB Advanced Media, Judge Figueredo provisionally sealed Exhibit B but required a showing before permanent sealing.
MLB Advanced Media, the plaintiffs, and the parties’ confidentiality designations concerning Exhibit B.
What happened
In Sportvision, Inc. et al. v. MLB Advanced Media, L.P., MLB Advanced Media asked the court to seal Exhibit B to its objection. The exhibit was a March 17, 2023 export report by the plaintiffs’ expert, Philip Green.
MLB Advanced Media said the report contained or described materials that the plaintiffs had marked confidential under a protective order. It asked the court to approve sealing based on those confidentiality designations.
Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo provisionally sealed Exhibit B but ruled that a protective-order designation alone was not enough for permanent sealing. Judge Figueredo directed the interested party to make the required showing under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga by January 27, 2025.
The detailed version
- Sportvision, Inc v. MLB Advanced Media L.P. · No. 1:18-cv-03025
- Paul Gardephe
- Dec. 30, 2024
Background
Defendant MLB Advanced Media, L.P. (MLBAM) filed a letter-motion asking to seal Exhibit B to its objection to a magistrate judge’s order concerning the plaintiffs’ request to partially lift a stay. Exhibit B was identified as a true and correct copy of the plaintiffs’ expert Philip Green’s March 17, 2023 Export Report.
MLBAM stated that parts of the report either had been designated or described materials designated as “Confidential,” “Highly Confidential — Limited,” or “Highly Confidential — Attorneys’ Eyes Only” by the plaintiffs under the parties’ amended confidentiality agreement and protective order.
Ruling
The document states that Exhibit B would be provisionally sealed. It also states that sealing based only on a designation under the protective order was not appropriate. The party seeking permanent sealing was directed to make the showing required by Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006), by January 27, 2025.
The endorsement is addressed to and identifies Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo, who issued the direction concerning provisional and permanent sealing.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.