Worley v. Simon Meyrowitz & Meyrowitz, P.C.

Background

Hattie Worley and Simon Meyrowitz & Meyrowitz, P.C. jointly submitted a proposed protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The order was intended to govern confidential information produced by either party or by non-parties during discovery, which is the pretrial exchange of information and documents.

Terms of the Protective Order

The order permits a party to designate documents or deposition testimony as confidential if the material contains trade secrets, proprietary or competitively sensitive business information, or business or personal information whose disclosure could be harmful. Examples include previously undisclosed financial information, information about ownership or control of a private company, business and marketing plans, and personal identifying information.

A person receiving material designated as confidential generally may not disclose it except to specified recipients. Those recipients include personnel working on the case, the parties’ lawyers and support staff, experts and consultants, the court and court personnel, deposition officers, and trial or deposition witnesses, subject to the order’s conditions. Confidential information may be used only for purposes of this litigation.

Experts, consultants, and deposition witnesses who receive confidential information must first receive a copy of the order and sign an agreement to follow it. Confidential information used at a hearing or trial may be disclosed only after the court determines what steps are needed to protect its confidentiality. The order also provides a process for challenging a confidentiality designation, with the producing party bearing the burden of showing that the designation is proper.

The parties must protect confidential information from unauthorized disclosure. Confidential information inadvertently produced without a designation may later be designated by written notice within a reasonable time. Extracts and summaries are also treated as confidential. The order does not waive privileges or establish that any material is admissible as evidence.

Court’s Order and Clarification

Judge Jesse Furman ordered the parties’ stipulation on July 22, 2022. The order states that confidential information must be returned or destroyed within 60 days after the litigation finally ends through settlement or completion of appeals, subject to the order’s other terms. The confidentiality obligations generally continue after the case ends.

The court expressly stated that it had not reviewed the documents and therefore made no finding that any particular document was confidential. Although the stipulation addressed filing confidential material under seal, the court clarified that it was not authorizing the parties to file documents under seal without a prior court order. Any sealing request remains subject to document-by-document review and the presumption favoring public access to judicial documents.