Sims v. Sony Music Entertainment

Background

The plaintiff and defendants jointly requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). A protective order sets rules for handling information exchanged during discovery, the evidence-gathering stage of a lawsuit. The parties stated that they might need to disclose nonpublic and competitively sensitive information.

The opinion identifies the defendants as Sony Music Entertainment; Darhyl Camper, Jr., doing business as Camp Star Music; Gabriella Wilson; HER Music Publishing, Inc., incorrectly named in the complaint as “I Am Her Music”; and Justin Barroso. It also notes that “RCA, A Division of Sony Music Entertainment” is not an independent legal entity capable of being sued.

Terms of the Order

The order permits a producing party to designate as “Confidential” portions of discovery material that it reasonably and in good faith believes contain previously undisclosed financial information, ownership or control information about a nonpublic company, business or marketing plans, product-development information, personal or intimate information, or another category later given confidential status by the court.

People covered by the order generally may not disclose confidential discovery material except as the order allows. Permitted recipients include the parties and certain insurers; counsel and their staff; outside vendors working on the case; mediators and arbitrators; document authors and recipients; potential witnesses; experts and other specialized advisers; deposition transcription staff; and the court. Some recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement.

The material may be used only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals. The order sets procedures for marking material, correcting an accidental failure to designate material as confidential, objecting to a designation, requesting additional limits such as “attorneys’ eyes only,” and filing confidential material with the court. Public filings generally must include redactions, while unredacted versions require an application and supporting declaration for sealing.

The court expressly stated that the order does not waive objections to discovery, waive privilege or other protection, or decide whether evidence is admissible at trial. It also stated that the court had not made a finding that any discovery material was actually confidential and retained discretion to decide whether confidential treatment was warranted. The order cautions that material introduced at trial is unlikely to remain sealed merely because it was previously designated confidential.

Disposition and Effect

The parties stipulated and agreed to the order, and the court found good cause for issuing it. Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered the parties and other persons with notice of the order to follow its terms, subject to contempt sanctions for violations. The order requires recipients, within 60 days after final disposition of the action and appeals, to return or—if the producing party permits—destroy confidential discovery material, with limited archival retention for attorneys’ case files. The order survives the end of the litigation, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.

This opinion is a discovery-related procedural order. It does not decide the merits of the plaintiff’s claims or the defendants’ defenses.