Keller v. About, Inc.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-00228
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Keller v. About, Judge Furman approved a protective order governing confidential discovery materials without deciding which materials are actually confidential.
Jackelyn Keller, About, Inc. d/b/a Dotdash, and people who receive or handle materials covered by the protective order.
What happened
Jackelyn Keller and About, Inc. d/b/a Dotdash jointly proposed rules for handling potentially confidential documents, testimony, and information exchanged in the case.
The order limits who may access those materials and allows them to be used only for preparing for, conducting, or defending the case. It also establishes procedures for challenging confidentiality designations, handling accidental disclosures, responding to subpoenas, and returning or destroying materials after the case ends.
Judge Jesse M. Furman approved the protective order on March 25, 2021. The court stated that approving it did not decide whether any particular material was confidential and did not authorize filing documents under seal without a separate court order.
The detailed version
- Keller v. About, Inc. · No. 1:21-cv-00228
- Jesse Furman
- Mar. 25, 2021
Background
The parties submitted a stipulated protective order to govern information exchanged in discovery that a party believed, in good faith, was entitled to confidential treatment under applicable law. The order covers documents, deposition testimony, declarations, other testimony, and the information contained in those materials. It also applies to any arbitration of Keller’s claims, as described in the order.
Terms of the Order
A party may designate qualifying material as “Confidential” before producing or disclosing it. The order provides procedures for marking documents and other items, identifying confidential deposition testimony, and correcting an inadvertent failure to apply a confidentiality designation. If the receiving party objects to a designation, the designating party has 30 days either to agree to remove the designation or file a motion seeking to uphold it. The designating party bears the burden of supporting the designation.
Access is limited to specified people, including the court or arbitrator, the parties and their lawyers and support staff, certain employees and agents, court reporters, witnesses, mock-jury participants, outside experts and consultants, and others approved in writing by the designating party. Some recipients must be told about the order’s requirements, and some must sign a certification agreeing to follow them. Confidential materials may be used only for preparing for, conducting, participating in, prosecuting, or defending the proceeding—not for business or other purposes.
The order also addresses subpoenas for confidential materials, unauthorized disclosures, requests to modify the order, use of confidential materials at trial, and the return or destruction of materials after settlement or termination. It preserves the parties’ rights to assert privileges, challenge confidentiality designations, seek additional protection, and seek judicial review.
Court’s Action
The court approved the stipulated protective order after finding good cause. Judge Jesse M. Furman expressly stated that the court had not reviewed the documents and therefore made no finding that any particular document was confidential. The court also stated that the order could not authorize filing documents under seal without a prior court order. The opinion does not decide the merits of Keller’s underlying claims or About, Inc.’s defenses.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.