Abbott Laboratories v. Feinberg
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:18-cv-08468
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Abbott Laboratories v. Carol Feinberg, Judge Schofield granted Abbott permission to file three exhibits with limited redactions under seal.
Abbott Laboratories may file the three exhibits with the approved redactions under seal; the order also protects specified artwork information and the private addresses of two nonparty witnesses.
What happened
Abbott Laboratories v. Carol Feinberg concerned Abbott’s request to protect information in three exhibits filed in opposition to the defendants’ choice-of-law motion. The requested redactions covered artwork identities and descriptions and the home addresses of two nonparty witnesses.
Abbott argued that the artwork information could harm the value of the painting and that the witnesses’ addresses were private and unrelated to the claims or defenses. The request was for permission to file Exhibits 1, 2, and 5 to a declaration in redacted form and under seal.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the request. The court found that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored to protect the artwork’s value and private information irrelevant to the claims or defenses.
The detailed version
- Abbott Laboratories v. Feinberg · No. 1:18-cv-08468
- Lorna Schofield
- Mar. 2, 2020
Background
Abbott Laboratories asked the court for permission to file Exhibits 1, 2, and 5 to the February 28, 2020, declaration of Judd B. Grossman in redacted form and under seal. The exhibits were submitted in opposition to the defendants’ choice-of-law motion.
Requested Redactions
Abbott sought to redact the identities of artworks, including the identity, title, and description of the painting at issue. Abbott also sought to redact the home addresses of two nonparty witnesses. The request stated that the artwork information could unnecessarily impair the artwork’s value and that the addresses were private information irrelevant to the claims or defenses.
Ruling
The court granted Abbott’s request. It held that Abbott could file Exhibits 1, 2, and 5 to the Grossman Declaration in redacted form and under seal. The court found that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored to prevent disclosure that could unnecessarily impair the artwork’s value and to protect private information irrelevant to the claims or defenses. The order did not decide the underlying choice-of-law motion.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.