Capri Sun GmbH v. American Beverage Corporation
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:19-cv-01422
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Capri Sun GmbH v. American Beverage Corporation, Judge Engelmayer granted ABC’s request to seal or redact confidential materials filed with its summary-judgment reply.
American Beverage Corporation and Capri Sun GmbH, as well as the parties whose confidential business, financial, deposition, expert, and litigation materials were covered by the sealing and redaction order.
What happened
In Capri Sun GmbH v. American Beverage Corporation, American Beverage Corporation asked the court to seal some documents and allow redactions in its reply papers supporting its motion for summary judgment. The materials included business and marketing information, financial information, and portions of deposition transcripts and expert reports.
American Beverage Corporation said the information was confidential under the protective order and could harm a party’s competitive position if disclosed. The request concerned materials that had already been sealed or redacted in earlier filings, as well as related excerpts and arguments in the reply papers.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer granted the request and ordered the listed documents sealed and the specified documents filed with redactions. The order did not decide the underlying summary-judgment motion.
The detailed version
- Capri Sun GmbH v. American Beverage Corporation · No. 1:19-cv-01422
- Paul Engelmayer
- July 16, 2021
Background
American Beverage Corporation (ABC), through its counsel, asked the court to seal certain documents filed with ABC’s reply memorandum supporting its motion for summary judgment and to permit redactions in other supporting documents. The request was made under the court’s individual rules and the protective order entered in the case.
The requested sealing and redactions covered materials that ABC said had already been sealed or redacted under earlier court orders. ABC also identified confidential business and marketing communications, competitive analysis, nonpublic financial information and analysis, deposition-transcript excerpts, expert-report excerpts, legal memoranda, and a response to Capri Sun’s statement of material facts.
Arguments and standard described
ABC argued that the materials were designated confidential or restricted under the protective order and contained information that could commercially or competitively disadvantage the disclosing party if made public. The letter cited categories that courts commonly protect, including trade secrets, confidential research and development information, marketing plans, revenue information, pricing information, sales information, and budgets.
Ruling
The court marked the request “Granted” and stated, “SO ORDERED.” Judge Paul A. Engelmayer therefore granted ABC’s request to seal the documents listed in its Exhibit A and granted permission to file the documents listed in Exhibit B with redactions. The order addressed filing access and confidentiality; it did not rule on the merits of the parties’ summary-judgment dispute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.