Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 19, 2021

The National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences v. Multimedia System Design

Full caption

The National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, Inc. v. Multimedia System Design, Inc.

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-07269
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In The National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences v. Multimedia System Design, Judge Caproni granted plaintiffs permission to file a rough deposition transcript under seal.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiffs in the case, particularly the plaintiffs who were authorized to file the rough deposition transcript under seal.

What happened

The National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, Inc. v. Multimedia System Design, Inc. involved a joint request by the parties to keep a deposition transcript from public filing for now.

The transcript was a rough version of Multimedia System Design, Inc.’s May 17, 2021 deposition. The parties said it was not final, could contain errors, and might receive confidentiality designations that they had not yet discussed or agreed on.

Judge Valerie Caproni granted the request. She allowed the plaintiffs to file the transcript under seal but reminded them that, after the transcript is finalized, they must file it and make specific requests to keep particular material sealed.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
The National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences v. Multimedia System Design · No. 1:20-cv-07269
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
May 19, 2021

Request

The parties jointly asked the court for permission to file under seal Exhibit A to a joint letter submitted before a pretrial conference. The exhibit was a rough transcript of a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of Defendant Multimedia System Design, Inc., dated May 17, 2021. A Rule 30(b)(6) deposition is testimony given by a company through a person designated to speak for it.

Parties’ Reasons

The parties said sealing was appropriate because the transcript was not in final form, might contain errors, and might later become subject to confidentiality designations. They also said those designations had not yet been discussed or agreed on.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni granted the application. The court allowed the plaintiffs to file the transcript under seal. The court also stated that, once the transcript is finalized, the plaintiffs must file it and make specific requests for sealing. The order addressed the filing and sealing of the transcript; it did not decide the underlying claims in the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.