Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 22, 2025

Cordero Romero v. Goldman Sachs Bank USA

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:25-cv-02857
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
9
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Cordero Romero v. Goldman Sachs, Judge Woods issued a protective order limiting disclosure and use of confidential discovery materials in the case.

Who this affects

Michael Cordero Romero, Goldman Sachs Bank USA, and the parties’ officers, agents, employees, attorneys, people acting with them, and other people with actual notice of the order who receive or handle designated confidential discovery material.

What happened

In Cordero Romero v. Goldman Sachs Bank USA, Goldman Sachs Bank USA asked the court to protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be exchanged during discovery.

The order allows parties to mark certain financial, business, ownership, personal, and other court-approved information as confidential. It limits disclosure to specified people, requires nondisclosure agreements for some recipients, and restricts use of the information to this case and related appeals.

Judge Woods issued the protective order on July 22, 2025. The order also sets procedures for filing confidential material, challenging confidentiality designations, returning or destroying the material after the case, and enforcing the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cordero Romero v. Goldman Sachs Bank USA · No. 1:25-cv-02857
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
July 22, 2025

Background

Goldman Sachs Bank USA requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). That rule allows a court to limit disclosure of discovery information for good cause. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored confidentiality order governing the pretrial phase of the action.

Confidentiality designations

The order defines “Discovery Material” as information of any kind produced or disclosed during discovery. A producing party may designate material as “Confidential” only when it reasonably and in good faith believes that the material includes:

- Previously undisclosed financial information, including profitability reports or estimates, fees, royalty rates, payment guarantees, sales reports, or sales margins; - Previously undisclosed information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; - Previously undisclosed business plans, product-development information, or marketing plans; - Personal or intimate information about an individual; or - Another category that the court later gives confidential status.

The producing party or its counsel must clearly mark confidential material and provide a version with the confidential information redacted for future public use. Deposition testimony and exhibits may be designated during the deposition or within 30 days afterward. During that 30-day period, the entire deposition transcript must be treated as confidential.

A producing party may also correct an earlier failure to designate material as confidential by giving written notice to the parties and providing replacement versions marked confidential within two business days.

Who may receive confidential material

The order limits disclosure to specified people, including the parties and their insurers; counsel and their assigned staff; outside vendors and service providers working on the case; mediators or arbitrators; people identified as authors or recipients of a document; potential witnesses; experts and other specialized advisers; deposition transcription staff; and the court, appellate courts, support personnel, and court reporters.

Before confidential material is disclosed to a mediator or arbitrator, potential witness, expert, or specialized adviser, that person must receive the order and sign the required nondisclosure agreement. Counsel must keep the signed agreements and produce them to opposing counsel before the person testifies or when the case ends, whichever comes first.

Court filings and challenges

The order does not waive objections to discovery, privileges, or protections, and it does not decide whether evidence will be admissible at trial. The court also did not make a finding that every designated item is actually confidential. It retained discretion to decide whether confidential treatment is appropriate.

When confidential discovery material is filed with the court, the parties must publicly file a redacted version and file the unredacted version under seal in accordance with the court’s rules. A party seeking to seal material must submit an application and supporting declaration explaining, on a particularized basis, why sealing is justified. The order warns that material introduced at trial is unlikely to remain sealed.

A party may object to a confidentiality designation in writing before trial. If the parties cannot promptly resolve the dispute, counsel must bring it to the court under the court’s individual practices. A party seeking additional disclosure limits, such as an attorneys’-eyes-only designation in extraordinary circumstances, must follow a similar procedure.

Use, return, and enforcement

Recipients may use confidential discovery material only to prosecute or defend this action and any appeals, not for another purpose or litigation. The order does not restrict a party’s rights concerning its own documents or information.

The order permits disclosure when required by a lawful subpoena, other compulsory process, law, or a government agency with jurisdiction, subject to written notice to the producing party as soon as reasonably possible and, when time permits, at least 10 days before disclosure. Recipients must take precautions against unauthorized or accidental disclosure.

Within 60 days after the final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients must return or, with the producing party’s permission, destroy confidential material and certify that they have not retained copies or other reproductions. Counsel specifically retained for the action may keep archival copies of specified case-related materials, but those copies remain subject to the order.

Disposition

The court ordered the parties and other people with notice of the order to comply with its terms, subject to contempt enforcement. The order survives the end of the litigation, and the court retains jurisdiction as needed to enforce its obligations or impose sanctions for contempt. Judge Gregory H. Woods signed the order on July 22, 2025. The opinion addresses discovery confidentiality and does not decide the underlying claims or the admissibility of any evidence.

The authoritative version

Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.