Nielsen Consumer LLC v. Circana Group, L.P.

Background

Nielsen Consumer LLC filed a letter motion on December 19, 2024, seeking permission to file under seal its motion for leave to file a fourth amended complaint, the proposed complaint, and related Exhibits A through G. Nielsen Consumer said the materials contained confidential NielsenIQ trade secrets, commercially sensitive information about the parties’ relationship and business and sales information, and documents designated as confidential or attorneys’ eyes only. Nielsen Consumer later filed proposed redactions.

Court’s Analysis

The court found the proposed redactions overbroad and inconsistent with the standard governing sealed court filings. That standard requires specific findings showing that sealing is necessary to protect an important interest and that the sealing is narrowly tailored to that interest.

The court gave examples of language that did not need to be redacted except for limited terms, including statements about employees’ concerns that an inclusion would violate a contract and a statement calling an inclusion a clear contract violation. The court also found that the name of a slide deck proposed for redaction was not confidential. It stated that the proposed amended complaint contained numerous other redactions that were not specific or narrowly tailored.

Disposition

The court denied Nielsen Consumer’s letter motion to seal without prejudice. It permitted Nielsen Consumer to file revised proposed redactions for the court’s consideration by January 16, 2025. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 418, 422, and 423, and to keep the document at ECF No. 423 under seal. Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker signed the order.