Sudakow v. Energy
Joanne Sudakow, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. CleanChoice Energy, Inc.
- Philip Halpern
- 7:23-cv-09685
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Joanne Sudakow v. CleanChoice Energy, Judge Halpern approved a protective order governing confidential discovery and limits on its disclosure.
The parties, their counsel and representatives, third parties providing discovery, and other people who receive or have notice of confidential discovery material are subject to the order. Certain witnesses, experts, vendors, mediators, and arbitrators must sign a nondisclosure agreement before receiving covered material.
What happened
Joanne Sudakow, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, and CleanChoice Energy agreed that the court should protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information exchanged during discovery. The court found good cause for a confidentiality order governing the pretrial phase of the case.
The order permits parties to mark specific discovery materials as confidential or as restricted to attorneys’ eyes only. It limits disclosure to specified people, requires confidentiality agreements for certain recipients, requires public redacted versions when confidential materials are filed, and limits use of the information to this case and related appeals. It also addresses challenges to confidentiality designations, accidentally disclosed privileged information, and the return or destruction of confidential materials after the case ends.
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the parties and other covered people to follow the protective order, subject to contempt sanctions for violations. The order does not decide the underlying claims, the admissibility of evidence, or whether any document will ultimately remain sealed.
The detailed version
- Sudakow v. Energy · No. 7:23-cv-09685
- Philip Halpern
- Oct. 22, 2025
Background
The parties, 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 disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately limited order covering the pretrial phase.
Confidentiality Rules
The order allows a producing party to designate only portions of discovery material that it reasonably and in good faith believes contain previously undisclosed financial information, information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company, business plans, product-development or marketing information, personal or intimate information, or another category later given confidential status by the court. A producing party may use the more restrictive “Confidential–Attorneys’ Eyes Only” designation only when disclosure to a competitor could cause significant competitive or commercial disadvantage.
Covered people generally may disclose confidential material only to specified recipients, including the parties and their counsel, counsel’s litigation staff, certain vendors, mediators or arbitrators, document authors and recipients, potential witnesses, experts and advisers, stenographers, and the court. Several categories of recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement. Confidential material may be used only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for business, commercial, competitive, or other litigation purposes.
Court Filings and Challenges
When confidential material is filed, the parties must publicly file a redacted version and file the unredacted version under seal. A party seeking continued sealing must also submit a letter brief and supporting declaration explaining the need on a particularized basis. The order states that the court retains discretion over confidential treatment of material submitted with motions or other proceedings and is unlikely to seal material introduced at trial. Parties may object to confidentiality designations or request additional disclosure limits; unresolved disputes are to be brought to the court under its individual practices.
Privilege and Closing Obligations
If privileged or work-product-protected information is accidentally disclosed, the disclosure does not waive the protection. After receiving a claim of accidental disclosure, the receiving party must return or destroy the information within five business days and provide a certification. The producing party must then provide a privilege log, while the receiving party may ask the court to compel production. Within 60 days after the final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients must return or destroy confidential material and certify that they retained no copies, subject to a limited archival-copy exception for attorneys specifically retained for the action.
Ruling
Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered the stipulated protective order and nondisclosure agreement. The order remains binding after the litigation ends, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce its obligations and impose contempt sanctions. It expressly does not waive discovery objections or privileges and does not decide the admissibility of any evidence.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.