Raanan v. Binance Holdings Limited

Nature of the order

The plaintiffs and defendants Binance Holdings Limited and Changpeng Zhao, through counsel, agreed to the protective order and asked the court to issue it under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). A protective order establishes rules for handling information exchanged during discovery. The court found good cause because the discovery could include confidential documents or information whose public disclosure could cause harm to a producing person or a third party owed a confidentiality duty.

Confidential discovery material

The order defines “Discovery Material” as information produced or disclosed during discovery in the action. A producing person may designate material “Confidential” when public disclosure is restricted by law or could harm business, commercial, financial, or personal interests. Listed categories include nonpublic financial information; information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; business, product-development, or marketing plans; personal or intimate information; trade secrets and other confidential commercial or research information; and confidential customer or client information.

The order does not provide blanket protection for every disclosure. It also does not automatically entitle a party to file confidential information under seal. The designating person may mark portions of documents as confidential, and deposition testimony may be designated during the deposition or within 30 days afterward. A producing person may also correct an earlier failure to designate material as confidential before trial, subject to the order’s procedures.

Who may receive the material

Confidential Discovery Material may be disclosed only to specified categories of people, including the parties and certain employees; counsel and their support staff; litigation-support vendors; mediators and arbitrators; document authors and addressees; potential witnesses; experts and other specialized advisers; insurers and related personnel; deposition reporters and videographers; people approved in writing by the parties; and the court and its personnel.

Before receiving the material, certain vendors, mediators, witnesses, and experts must receive a copy of the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement. People with access must take precautions against unauthorized or accidental disclosure. The material may be used only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for business, commercial, competitive, or other litigation purposes.

Disputes, sealing, and privileged material

A party may object to a confidentiality designation or request additional limits, such as an attorneys’-eyes-only restriction, before trial. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute, they must bring it to the court under Local Civil Rule 37.2. The order requires public redacted filings and separately filed unredacted versions when confidential material is submitted to the court. It states that confidential designation alone does not establish that material should be sealed and that the court retains discretion over confidential treatment.

The order also addresses information accidentally disclosed despite a claim of attorney-client privilege, work-product protection, or another applicable protection. The receiving party generally must return or destroy the material within five business days and provide a certification. The producing person must then provide a privilege log, and the receiving party may ask the court to compel production. The producing person retains the burden of establishing that the material is privileged or otherwise protected.

End of the case and enforcement

The protective order remains binding after the litigation ends. Within 30 days after final disposition, recipients must return or, with the producing person’s permission, destroy confidential material and certify that they have not retained copies or other reproductions. Attorneys may retain archival copies of specified case materials, but those copies remain subject to the order. Willful violations may result in contempt of court, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce the order and impose contempt sanctions.

Ruling

Judge John G. Koeltl ordered the stipulated protective order. The order governs discovery confidentiality and does not decide the parties’ underlying claims, waive objections or privileges, or determine the admissibility of evidence.