Goat Fashion Limited v. 1661, Inc.

Background

Goat Fashion Limited and 1661, Inc., through their attorneys, 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 governing the pretrial phase of the action.

Confidentiality Designations

The order permits a producing party—the party providing discovery material—to designate only portions that it reasonably and in good faith believes contain protected information. Listed categories include previously undisclosed financial information; information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; business plans, product-development information, and marketing plans; previously undisclosed vendor, customer, or service-user identities; personal or intimate information; and other categories later given confidential status by the court.

Material may be marked “Confidential” or “Confidential—Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” The order does not itself determine that any material is actually confidential and preserves the court’s discretion to decide whether confidential treatment is appropriate.

Limits on Disclosure and Use

Confidential material may be disclosed only to specified people, including the parties, counsel and their support personnel, litigation-service providers, certain mediators or arbitrators, document authors and recipients, certain witnesses, experts, stenographers, and the court. Witnesses, experts, mediators, and arbitrators who receive protected material generally must first sign the attached nondisclosure agreement.

Attorneys’-eyes-only material is subject to narrower disclosure limits. It may generally be shared only with court personnel, counsel and necessary law-firm employees, certain document creators or recipients, specified witnesses, litigation-support companies, court reporters, and consulting or testifying experts who sign the required agreement. Other disclosure requires written consent from the producing party or a further court order after notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Recipients may use protected material only to prosecute or defend this action and any appeals, not for another purpose or litigation. The order does not restrict a party’s rights concerning its own documents or information.

Court Filings, Challenges, and Enforcement

A party filing protected discovery material or court papers that reveal it must publicly file a redacted version. A party seeking to file such material under seal must apply under the court’s individual rules. The order warns that documents may be unsealed unless the court makes specific findings that sealing is essential and narrowly tailored.

A party may object to a confidentiality designation or request additional disclosure limits before trial. If the parties cannot promptly resolve the dispute, counsel must bring it to the court under the applicable individual rule. The order also preserves objections to discovery, privileges, and arguments about whether evidence is admissible at trial.

Within 60 days after the final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients must return or, with the producing party’s permission, destroy protected material and certify that they have not retained copies or other reproductions. Attorneys specifically retained for the action may keep archival copies of specified case materials and work product, which remain subject to the order. The order continues after the litigation ends, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.

Disposition

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer entered the stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order. The opinion does not decide the parties’ underlying claims or defenses.