Jeremiah v. Sing Tao Newspapers New York LTD.

Background

The parties, through their lawyers, 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 disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately limited confidentiality order and entered the parties’ stipulated agreement.

What the Order Covers

The order allows a producing party to designate as “Confidential” only material that it reasonably and in good faith believes includes previously undisclosed financial information; information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; business, product-development, or marketing plans; personal or intimate information; or another category later given confidential status by the court.

Confidential material generally may be disclosed only to the parties, certain insurers and lawyers, counsel’s support staff and vendors, mediators or arbitrators, people identified as recipients of a document, potential witnesses, experts and specialized advisers, deposition stenographers, and the court. Some recipients— including mediators, potential witnesses, and experts—must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement.

The order provides procedures for marking materials, designating deposition testimony, correcting an earlier failure to mark material as confidential, and objecting to a confidentiality designation. It also permits a party to request additional limits, such as an “attorneys’ eyes only” designation, in extraordinary circumstances.

Confidential material may be used only to prosecute or defend this case and related appeals. The order does not waive objections to discovery, privilege, or evidentiary objections. It also does not decide whether designated material is actually confidential or whether evidence will be admissible at trial.

Court Filings and Sealing

A party filing confidential discovery material must publicly file a redacted version and separately file an unredacted version under seal, consistent with the court’s rules. A party seeking sealing must submit an application and supporting declaration explaining, on a particularized basis, why sealing is justified. The order warns that the court is unlikely to keep material confidential if it is introduced at trial.

Disposition and Effect

The order requires recipients, within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, to return or—if the producing party permits—destroy confidential material and certify that they have not retained copies or reproductions. Lawyers specifically retained for the case may keep archival copies of specified case-related materials, but those copies remain subject to the order. The order continues after the litigation ends, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.

Judge Gregory H. Woods entered the stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order on August 7, 2025. The opinion is a discovery-related procedural order; it does not decide the merits of the underlying dispute.