Brown v. Equifax Information Services LLC
- Gregory Woods
- 1:21-cv-09257
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
In Brown v. Equifax, Judge Woods entered a stipulated protective order governing confidential discovery information.
Micah Brown, Equifax Information Services LLC, their counsel and specified representatives, and other people who receive or have actual notice of confidential discovery material under the order.
What happened
In Brown v. Equifax Information Services LLC, the parties asked the Southern District of New York to enter a protective order for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information disclosed during discovery. The parties agreed to the order through their lawyers.
The order limits disclosure of information marked confidential, including certain nonpublic financial, business, personal, and intimate information. It allows disclosure to specified people, such as the parties, lawyers, experts, witnesses, mediators, and the court, subject to stated conditions. Confidential information may be used only for this case and related appeals.
The court found good cause and entered the stipulated protective order on February 3, 2022. Judge Gregory H. Woods stated that the court had not itself decided that any material was confidential and retained discretion over sealing court filings. The order also requires most recipients to return or destroy confidential materials within 60 days after the case, including appeals, ends.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Equifax Information Services LLC · No. 1:21-cv-09257
- Gregory Woods
- Feb. 3, 2022
Background
The parties jointly requested a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) to govern nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored order governing the pretrial phase of the action.
Terms of the Order
The order requires the parties, their officers, agents, employees, attorneys, people acting with them, and others with actual notice of the order to protect discovery material designated as confidential. A producing party may designate only material that it reasonably and in good faith believes includes specified categories, such as previously undisclosed financial information; information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; business, product-development, or marketing plans; personal or intimate information; or another category later given confidential status by the court.
The order sets procedures for marking confidential material, designating deposition testimony and exhibits, and correcting an earlier failure to designate material. It preserves objections to discovery requests, privileges, protections, and challenges to admissibility at trial.
Confidential discovery material may be disclosed only to specified recipients, including the parties and their insurers, counsel and litigation-support personnel, outside vendors, mediators or arbitrators, certain people identified on a document, potential witnesses, experts and advisers, deposition stenographers, and the court. Some recipients must first receive the order and sign a non-disclosure agreement. People receiving confidential material may use it only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for another purpose or proceeding.
The order also addresses subpoenas and other compulsory process, requires precautions against unauthorized or accidental disclosure, and provides procedures for objecting to confidentiality designations or requesting additional limits such as attorneys'-eyes-only treatment. Most recipients must return or destroy confidential material within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, and certify that they have retained no copies or reproductions. Counsel specifically retained for the action may keep certain archival materials, which remain subject to the order. The order survives the end of the litigation, and the court retains jurisdiction to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.
Court Filings and Sealing
When confidential discovery material is filed with the court, the parties must publicly file a redacted version and file the unredacted version under seal as required by the court's rules. A party seeking to file material under seal must submit an application and supporting declaration providing a particularized justification. The court warned that it had made no finding that designated material was actually confidential and might not seal or otherwise protect material introduced at trial.
Ruling
The court entered the stipulated confidentiality and protective order. Judge Gregory H. Woods's order governed the handling and use of designated confidential discovery material but did not decide the material's ultimate confidentiality or admissibility.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.