Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Dec. 16, 2019

Whaley v. C R Bard Incorporated

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:19-cv-08524
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Whaley v. C. R. Bard, Inc., Judge Karas’s filing describes Whaley’s request to seal confidential material, but the provided text contains no ruling.

Who this affects

Shirley Whaley and the defendants, C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc., are affected by the request to seal Exhibit A; the provided text does not show whether the request was granted or denied.

What happened

Whaley filed a motion asking to keep Exhibit A to her motion to consolidate under seal. The exhibit concerns consolidation of three listed cases involving C. R. Bard, Inc., Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc., and other plaintiffs identified in the filing.

The motion says the exhibit contains confidential information protected by a stipulated protective order in the Bard multidistrict litigation. It argues that the information includes proprietary and trade-secret material designated as confidential by the defendants.

The provided text is the plaintiff’s motion, signed by counsel, not an order deciding the request. Judge Kenneth M. Karas’s ruling on the motion is not included in the provided text.

The detailed version

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

Case
Whaley v. C R Bard Incorporated · No. 7:19-cv-08524
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Dec. 16, 2019

Background

Shirley Whaley filed a motion for permission to submit Exhibit A to her motion to consolidate under seal. The motion concerns three cases identified as Johnson v. C.R. Bard Incorporated, et al., No. 7:19-cv-08478-KMK; Petro v. C.R. Bard Incorporated, et al., No. 7:19-cv-08480-KMK; and Whaley v. C.R. Bard Incorporated, et al., No. 7:19-cv-08524-KMK.

Arguments

Whaley’s motion states that Exhibit A contains confidential information protected by the stipulated protective order in the Bard multidistrict litigation. It says the defendants designated the exhibit as confidential because disclosure would reveal confidential, proprietary, and trade-secret information. The motion relies on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1), which allows a court to protect certain confidential commercial information from public disclosure when there is good cause.

Disposition

The provided text contains the plaintiff’s request and legal arguments but does not include an order granting, denying, or otherwise deciding the motion. Accordingly, no disposition of the sealing request can be stated from this text. Judge Kenneth M. Karas is identified as the judge, but his ruling is not included.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.