TransPerfect Global, Inc. v. Lionbridge Technologies, Inc.

Background

TransPerfect Global, Inc. asked for permission to file materials under seal in connection with its opposition to defendants’ motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. The request identified exhibits to declarations by Malcolm Seymour, Martin Russo, and Daniel Branower. It also sought permission to file redacted public versions of TransPerfect’s opposition memorandum and two declarations.

Materials and Reasons for Sealing

The requested materials included communications between counsel, contention-interrogatory responses, deposition-testimony excerpts, and documents produced by defendants. The letter stated that these materials contained or referred to trade secrets, confidential business and financial information, sensitive business strategy, proprietary business information, and information designated confidential or highly confidential under the court’s confidentiality order. Some proposed redactions involved information from defendants’ billing records that defendants’ counsel had filed under seal.

TransPerfect argued that public disclosure could cause competitive and financial harm to TransPerfect, defendants, or other parties that had designated information as confidential. It also requested permission to submit a video file and an Excel spreadsheet in native format on a password-protected thumb drive, stating that the electronic filing system did not accept those formats and that conversion could result in lost functionality.

Ruling

The court’s order states: “Granted.” The court therefore granted TransPerfect’s request for sealing, redacted filings, and submission of the specified native-format exhibits. The opinion does not provide a separate explanation of the court’s reasoning beyond the request letter and the one-word ruling. Judge Denise L. Cote entered the order dated April 4, 2022.