Price v. L'Oreal USA, Inc.
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:17-cv-00614
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Price v. L'Oreal USA, Inc., Judge Schofield granted defendants' motion to seal confidential filings in a class-action dispute.
The defendants and the parties responsible for filing the specified materials must submit public redacted versions and sealed unredacted versions; public access to the confidential portions is restricted.
What happened
Price v. L'Oreal USA, Inc. concerns filings connected to defendants' motion to decertify the classes and exclude expert testimony. The defendants asked to file public redacted versions and sealed unredacted versions of specified briefs and exhibits.
The materials contained information designated confidential under the parties' confidentiality and protective order. The defendants argued that sealing was necessary to prevent unauthorized disclosure of confidential business information.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the motion to seal and directed the parties to file redacted public versions and unredacted sealed versions. The Clerk was directed to close the motion at Docket No. 295.
The detailed version
- Price v. L'Oreal USA, Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-00614
- Lorna Schofield
- Feb. 3, 2021
Background
The order concerns defendants' motion to redact and file under seal materials submitted in connection with their motion to decertify the classes and to exclude the expert testimony of Jean-Pierre Dubé. The materials included defendants' supporting memorandum and specified exhibits to declarations by Frederick B. Warder III, Joshua Kipnees, and Rachel Soffin.
The defendants stated that the materials contained information designated “Confidential” under the parties' Joint Confidentiality Stipulation and Protective Order. The motion sought permission to file public redacted versions and unredacted versions under seal.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that the common-law right of public access to judicial documents is not absolute. Courts must balance that presumption of access against competing considerations, based on the facts and circumstances of the case. The court found that redacting the referenced documents and filing the unredacted versions under seal was necessary to prevent unauthorized dissemination of confidential business information.
Ruling
Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted defendants' motion to seal. The parties were ordered to publicly file redacted versions and file unredacted versions under seal. The Clerk of Court was respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket No. 295. This order does not state a ruling on the separate motion to decertify the classes or the motion to exclude expert testimony.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.