Advanced Knowledge Tech LLC v. Fleitas
- P. Castel
- 1:21-cv-00992
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 10
In Advanced Knowledge Tech LLC v. Fleitas, Judge Castel entered a stipulated protective order governing confidential discovery materials.
Advanced Knowledge Tech LLC, Marcello Fleitas, their counsel and representatives, and other people who receive discovery material designated as confidential in this action.
What happened
Advanced Knowledge Tech LLC and Marcello Fleitas asked the Southern District of New York to approve an agreement protecting nonpublic and competitively sensitive information exchanged during discovery.
The order limits disclosure of designated confidential materials to specified people, including the parties, lawyers, certain witnesses, experts, vendors, and the court. It permits use of the materials only for this case and related appeals, and requires precautions against unauthorized disclosure.
Judge Castel ordered the parties and other covered people to follow the agreement. The order also sets procedures for challenging confidentiality designations, seeking to seal court filings, returning or destroying materials after the case ends, and enforcing the order through contempt sanctions.
The detailed version
- Advanced Knowledge Tech LLC v. Fleitas · No. 1:21-cv-00992
- P. Castel
- Aug. 17, 2022
Nature of the order
The court entered a stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The parties requested protection for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored order covering the pretrial phase of the case.
Information that may be designated confidential
A producing party may designate material as confidential only when it reasonably and in good faith believes the material includes previously undisclosed information such as financial information, ownership or control information about a nonpublic company, business or marketing plans, or personal, medical, or intimate information. The court may also give other categories confidential status later.
The order explains how documents, deposition exhibits, and deposition testimony must be marked or identified as confidential. A producing party may correct an earlier failure to designate material by giving written notice and providing replacement versions within two business days.
Limits on disclosure and use
People covered by the order may disclose confidential discovery material only to listed recipients, including the parties and their insurers, counsel and support staff, vendors working for counsel, mediators or arbitrators, certain document recipients and witnesses, experts, deposition reporters, and the court. Some recipients must first receive a copy of the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement.
Recipients may use the material only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for another purpose or litigation. They must take reasonable precautions to prevent unauthorized or accidental disclosure. The order does not waive objections to discovery, privileges, or protections, and it does not decide whether any material is admissible at trial.
Challenges and court filings
The court made no finding that any designated material is actually confidential and retained discretion to decide whether to provide confidential treatment. A party may object to a designation before trial, and the parties must bring unresolved disputes to the court under the court’s individual practices.
The order does not itself authorize filing documents under seal. A party seeking to seal material must file an application and supporting declaration addressing the particular documents and the applicable sealing standards. Public redacted filings and unredacted copies must be submitted as required by the order and the court’s rules.
End of the case and enforcement
Within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients must return confidential material to the producing party or destroy it if the producing party permits, and certify that they kept no copies or other reproductions. Counsel specifically retained for the case may keep archival copies of specified case materials, but those copies remain subject to the order.
The order survives termination of the litigation. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the obligations and impose contempt sanctions. The order also includes a separate nondisclosure agreement for people who receive protected discovery material.
Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.