State of New York v. Deutsche Telekom AG
- Victor Marrero
- 1:19-cv-05434
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In State of New York v. Deutsche Telekom AG, Judge Lehrburger ruled which AT&T and Comcast documents could remain confidential at trial.
AT&T and Comcast, as non-parties seeking confidentiality for trial documents, and the public, which retains access to documents not approved for confidentiality or not properly redacted.
What happened
State of New York v. Deutsche Telekom AG concerns requests by non-parties AT&T and Comcast to keep certain documents confidential during trial. The court had previously required the requests to be narrowed under Second Circuit standards for public access to court documents.
The court allowed four Comcast documents to remain confidential, required redactions to several other Comcast documents, and ordered that all other Comcast documents not remain confidential. No AT&T document was approved for complete confidentiality; the court required redactions to seven listed AT&T documents and rejected confidentiality for all others. It specifically ruled that an exchange between an AT&T executive and a policy director of AT&T’s largest union could not remain confidential.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger issued the order on December 10, 2019, after reviewing the documents, the parties’ submissions, and the applicable public-access standards.
The detailed version
- State of New York v. Deutsche Telekom AG · No. 1:19-cv-05434
- Victor Marrero
- Dec. 10, 2019
Background
Non-parties Altice, AT&T, and Comcast asked to keep certain documents confidential at trial. The court had previously directed the parties and non-parties to reduce their requests to those that could satisfy Second Circuit standards. The court had already ruled on the Altice documents. This order addressed the AT&T and Comcast documents discussed during a telephone conference on December 10, 2019.
The court considered each document, the parties’ submissions and arguments, prior proceedings, the presumption that judicial documents are available to the public, AT&T’s and Comcast’s status as non-parties, and the standards stated in Lugosch v. Pyramid Company of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006).
Rulings on Comcast Documents
The court ruled that Comcast documents identified by Bates numbers 6832, 27231, 27807, 29794, and 1690 could remain confidential at trial.
The court ordered redactions limited to confidential material, if any, for Comcast documents 27230, 31662, 33419, 18713, 19629, 58961, 58965, 22617, 36561, 36710, and 36733. The order noted that document 31662 appeared to summarize information from third parties and general trends; document 33419 appeared largely drawn from a JPMorgan report, with only interlineated comments by Comcast personnel potentially remaining confidential; and document 22617 appeared to report data available to anyone who paid to receive it, in which case none of it could remain confidential.
The court ordered that any Comcast document not listed in the order could not remain confidential.
Rulings on AT&T Documents
The order listed “N.A.” under AT&T documents that could remain confidential at trial, indicating that no specific AT&T document was identified in that category.
The court ordered redactions limited to confidential material, if any, for AT&T documents 147567, 167878, 135464, 6902, 34269, 37371, and 165967. Any AT&T document not listed could not remain confidential.
The court specifically ruled that the exchange of information between AT&T’s Executive Vice President of Regulatory Affairs and the Policy Director of AT&T’s largest union could not remain confidential at trial.
Disposition
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger entered the confidentiality and redaction directions and ordered the parties to comply with them. The opinion does not resolve the underlying claims in the larger case; it addresses access to particular documents at trial.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.