Naula Ndugga v. Bloomberg L.P.
- Gregory Woods
- 1:20-cv-07464
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Nafessa Syeed v. Bloomberg L.P., Judge Woods issued a protective order governing confidential discovery materials in the lawsuit.
The parties—Nafessa Syeed, Naula Ndugga, and Bloomberg L.P.—along with their counsel, representatives, employees, agents, certain witnesses, experts, service providers, and other people with actual notice of the order. They must follow its limits on confidential discovery material and may face contempt sanctions for willful violations.
What happened
Nafessa Syeed and Naula Ndugga sued Bloomberg L.P., and all parties asked the court to establish rules protecting nonpublic and sensitive information exchanged during discovery. The order addressed only discovery confidentiality and did not decide the underlying claims.
The court allowed parties to designate certain financial, business, personal, medical, personnel, and commercially sensitive information as confidential or as limited to attorneys’ eyes. It restricted disclosure, required written confidentiality agreements for some recipients, established procedures for challenging designations and filing protected materials, and required most protected materials to be returned or destroyed after the case ends.
Judge Gregory H. Woods found good cause and issued the amended confidentiality agreement and protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The order binds people with notice, remains effective after the litigation ends, and permits the court to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.
The detailed version
- Naula Ndugga v. Bloomberg L.P. · No. 1:20-cv-07464
- Gregory Woods
- Mar. 4, 2022
Nature of the Order
The court issued an amended confidentiality agreement and protective order for the pretrial phase of the action. The parties had requested the order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), which allows a court to protect parties and others from harm related to discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately limited order. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims or the admissibility of evidence at trial.
Protected Information
The order covers discovery material designated as either “Confidential” or “Confidential-Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” A producing party may designate material as confidential only when it reasonably and in good faith believes the material includes previously undisclosed financial information, information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company, business or marketing plans, personal or intimate information, personnel records, or another category later given confidential status by the court.
A producing party may use the attorneys’ eyes only designation when it reasonably and in good faith believes the information is highly sensitive and that disclosure to the requesting party would cause more harm than limiting the requesting party’s counsel’s ability to evaluate and use it. Examples include personnel, disciplinary, leave, recruiting, compensation, medical, health, and commercially sensitive information. The order states that a designation may be challenged and that the court has not itself found that any designated material is confidential.
Disclosure Limits and Challenges
People subject to the order may disclose confidential material only to specified recipients, including the parties, certain counsel and support personnel, vendors, mediators or arbitrators, people identified on a document, potential witnesses, experts, deposition stenographers, and the court. Some recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement. Attorneys’ eyes only material has additional disclosure restrictions, including disclosure to the defendant’s insurer or another person only as allowed by the order.
The order permits a party to object to a confidentiality designation at any time before trial by giving written notice that explains the objection. The producing party must then explain why the protection should remain. If the parties cannot promptly resolve the dispute, the matter may be brought to the court under the court’s practice rules.
Court Filings and Use of Materials
Confidential discovery material may be used only to prosecute or defend this action and any appeals, not for another lawsuit or purpose. Parties must publicly file redacted versions of court submissions containing protected material and file unredacted versions under seal when permitted by the court’s rules. A party seeking sealing must submit a particularized justification, and the order warns that the court may unseal material if the required findings are not made. The order also states that confidential treatment during discovery does not establish that material will be sealed or protected if introduced at trial.
Duration and Enforcement
Within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients generally must return or destroy confidential discovery material and certify that they have not retained copies or other reproductions. Certain archival attorney materials may be retained but remain subject to the order. The order survives termination of the litigation. The court retains jurisdiction to enforce the order and impose sanctions for contempt.
Disposition
Judge Gregory H. Woods ordered the parties and other people with actual notice to follow the protective order. The order was entered on March 4, 2022.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.