Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc.
- Figueredo
- 1:20-cv-04583
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Penske Media v. Shutterstock: Judge Figueredo granted the parties’ request to seal parts of a deposition transcript.
Penske Media Corporation and Shutterstock, Inc., whose deposition transcript will have portions sealed, as well as members of the public seeking access to that material.
What happened
In Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc., the parties jointly asked the court to seal portions of Stan Pavlovsky’s deposition transcript, which had been filed in connection with discovery disputes.
They said the transcript included confidential information about internal business operations and financial terms related to the parties. The court found that protecting those business interests outweighed the public’s interest in seeing the sealed material.
Judge Valerie Figueredo granted the request to seal and directed the clerk to terminate the motion. The order did not resolve the underlying discovery disputes or the case’s merits.
The detailed version
- Penske Media Corporation v. Shutterstock, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-04583
- Figueredo
- Oct. 18, 2022
Background
On June 9, 2022, Penske Media Corporation and Shutterstock, Inc. jointly submitted a letter asking the court to seal portions of Stan Pavlovsky’s deposition transcript. The transcript had been filed in response to an order seeking documents connected to discovery disputes raised by the parties.
Request to Seal
The parties stated that the relevant portions contained confidential information, including information about internal business operations and certain financial terms related to the parties. The court applied the standard described by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. The court found that legitimate business interests justified restricting access to the material and outweighed the public’s interest in the sealed information.
Ruling
The court granted the request to seal the deposition transcript. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 136. The order addressed access to the transcript and did not decide the underlying discovery disputes or the merits of the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.