Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 10, 2022

Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:18-cv-11386
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Spectrum Dynamics v. General Electric, Judge Broderick approved redactions to a hearing transcript to protect confidential business information.

Who this affects

The parties and the public’s access to the April 29, 2022 hearing transcript were affected. The specified transcript passages were to be redacted before public filing.

What happened

Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company concerns a joint request about public access to the transcript of an April 29, 2022 hearing. The parties said some transcript passages contained confidential business information.

The defendants asked the court to direct the court reporter to redact highlighted passages on pages 16, 19, 26–27, 32, and 54–55. They said disclosure could cause competitive harm and that the request was narrowly limited.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick approved the requested redactions, as shown by the document’s “SO ORDERED” notation dated August 10, 2022. The order did not decide the underlying dispute.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company · No. 1:18-cv-11386
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
Aug. 10, 2022

Background

The document is a request by the defendants in Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company, et al. The request concerned the transcript of an April 29, 2022 Markman hearing, a hearing used in a patent case to address the meaning of patent-claim terms. The parties had previously entered a confidentiality and protective order.

The request

The defendants stated that the parties jointly asked the court to make the hearing transcript publicly available with redactions. They identified highlighted passages on pages 16, 19, 26–27, 32, and 54–55. According to the request, those passages contained information that one or both parties asserted was competitively sensitive and proprietary. The request said disclosure could create a substantial risk of harm and that the proposed redactions were narrowly tailored.

Ruling

The document bears Judge Vernon S. Broderick’s “SO ORDERED” notation dated August 10, 2022. The court therefore approved the requested redactions before the transcript was made publicly available. The order addressed confidentiality and public access to the transcript; it did not resolve the underlying patent dispute or otherwise state a ruling on the merits.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.