Andy Ryan Photographer, LLC v. Ginnel Associates, Inc.
- John Koeltl
- 1:24-cv-05720
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Andy Ryan Photographer v. Innel Associates, Judge Koeltl entered a protective order governing confidential discovery information in the lawsuit.
The parties, their counsel, employees and agents, insurers, experts, witnesses, vendors, and other people who receive or handle discovery material covered by the order.
What happened
Andy Ryan Photographer, LLC v. Innel Associates, et al. concerns the parties’ agreement to protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information exchanged during discovery.
The order limits disclosure of information labeled “Confidential” or “Highly Confidential—Attorney’s Eyes Only,” allows disclosure only to specified people, and restricts use to this lawsuit and related appeals. It also sets procedures for challenging confidentiality labels, filing protected materials with the court, handling accidentally produced privileged material, and returning or destroying protected information after the case ends.
Judge Koeltl found good cause and entered the stipulated protective order. The order does not decide whether any information is actually confidential or whether evidence may be used at trial, and the court retained authority to enforce the order.
The detailed version
- Andy Ryan Photographer, LLC v. Ginnel Associates, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-05720
- John Koeltl
- Jan. 23, 2025
Background
The parties, acting through counsel, jointly requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). They sought protection for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be exchanged during discovery. The court found good cause for a tailored confidentiality order covering the pretrial phase of the action.
Protective-order requirements
The order permits a producing party to designate only qualifying portions of discovery material as “Confidential,” including nonpublic financial information, information concerning ownership or control of a nonpublic company, business and marketing plans, personal or intimate information, and sensitive or proprietary financial, technical, marketing, commercial, or other business information that qualifies for protection under Rule 26. The order also permits a “Highly Confidential—Attorney’s Eyes Only” designation subject to additional limits.
People subject to the order may disclose confidential material only to specified recipients, including the parties when needed for the action, their insurers and insurance counsel, counsel and supporting staff, vendors working on the case, the court, certain authors or recipients of documents, potential witnesses, and experts or other specialized advisers. Witnesses, experts, and certain other recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement.
The order restricts use of protected material to prosecuting or defending this action and related appeals. It establishes procedures for designating deposition testimony, correcting an inadvertent failure to designate material, objecting to a confidentiality designation, and requesting additional limits such as attorney-only access. It also provides that a party seeking to file protected material under seal must submit a particularized justification, and warns that the court may not keep such material sealed if the legal standard for sealing is not met.
The order preserves objections to discovery, privileges, and evidentiary objections. It provides that an inadvertent production of privileged or attorney-work-product material does not waive the protection and generally requires the receiving party to return or destroy the material, subject to a procedure for challenging the privilege claim. Within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients generally must return or destroy confidential material and certify that they have not retained copies, while counsel may keep limited archival case files that remain subject to the order.
Ruling and effect
The court entered the stipulated protective order after finding good cause. The order states that the court made no finding that any particular discovery material is confidential and retains discretion over confidential treatment, including at trial. It also provides that the order survives termination of the litigation and that the court retains jurisdiction as needed to enforce it or impose contempt sanctions. The order is not binding on the court or court personnel.
Classification
This is a procedural order concerning discovery and confidentiality. It does not resolve the parties’ underlying claims or defenses.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.