Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:18-cv-11386
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Spectrum Dynamics v. General Electric, Judge Parker granted extra-page requests and motions to seal discovery filings, while reserving a claw-back challenge.
The parties to the discovery dispute, and members of the public seeking access to the sealed court filings.
What happened
The order in Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company concerns the parties’ requests related to a discovery dispute. Defendants asked to file an eight-page motion challenging Plaintiff’s claw-back, and Plaintiff asked to file a six-page response; both sides also requested permission to file their papers under seal.
The court granted both motions to file extra pages and granted both motions to seal. It found that the confidential and sensitive nature of the documents overcame the reduced presumption that court filings connected to discovery disputes should be publicly accessible. The court said it would address the claw-back motion separately.
Judge Katharine H. Parker issued the order and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the four resolved motions.
The detailed version
- Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company · No. 1:18-cv-11386
- Vernon Broderick
- Sept. 30, 2022
Background
The parties made several requests concerning a discovery dispute. Defendants sought permission to file an eight-page letter motion challenging Plaintiff’s claw-back, and Plaintiff sought permission to file a six-page response. Each side also asked to file its submission under seal.
Rulings
The court granted Defendants’ and Plaintiff’s motions for leave to file excess pages. The court also granted both motions to seal. It explained that court documents generally carry a presumption of public access, but that presumption is lower for documents filed in connection with a discovery dispute than for material introduced at trial or submitted with a motion that could resolve the case. The court found that the confidential and sensitive nature of the documents was sufficient to overcome that reduced presumption.
The court stated that it would address the motion challenging the claw-back separately. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 527, 528, 532, and 533.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.