Nespresso USA, Inc. v. Williams-Sonoma, Inc.
- Loretta Preska
- 1:19-cv-04223
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Nespresso USA v. Williams-Sonoma, Judge Parker granted the parties’ request to keep two confidential discovery exhibits sealed.
Nespresso USA, Inc. and Williams-Sonoma, Inc.; the two exhibits will remain sealed and accessible only to the parties and the court.
What happened
Nespresso USA, Inc. v. Williams-Sonoma, Inc. concerns two exhibits containing Nespresso’s confidential business communications.
The parties jointly asked to file the exhibits under seal, while publicly filing substitute pages. They said the exhibits were covered by the court’s protective order and contained information exchanged during discovery.
Judge Katharine H. Parker granted the request and directed the Clerk to keep the exhibits sealed, with access limited to the parties and the court.
The detailed version
- Nespresso USA, Inc. v. Williams-Sonoma, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-04223
- Loretta Preska
- Mar. 9, 2021
Background
The parties jointly sought permission to file two exhibits under seal. The exhibits contained information that Nespresso had designated as “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” under the court’s protective order. The parties described the exhibits as confidential business communications exchanged during discovery.
Parties’ Position
The parties argued that the exhibits were judicial documents but that the presumption of public access was low because the information came from discovery and did not play a significant role in the court’s decision-making. They also argued that Nespresso had significant privacy interests in the confidential communications and that sealing the exhibits was narrowly tailored to protect those interests. Williams-Sonoma publicly filed substitute pages and filed the complete exhibits under seal.
Ruling
Judge Katharine H. Parker granted the request for the same reasons cited in an earlier court ruling identified as ECF No. 143. The court directed the Clerk to keep the document filed at ECF No. 149 sealed, with access limited to the parties and the court.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.