Hyper Bicycles, Inc. v. Acctel, Ltd.

Background

The document is a confidentiality stipulation and proposed protective order in litigation involving Hyper Bicycles, Inc., Acctel, Ltd., and, in one of the consolidated cases, Tapesh Sinha. The caption identifies the related matter as Case No. 22-cv-3308-DLC, in which Acctel is the consolidated plaintiff and Hyper Bicycles is the consolidated defendant. The parties agreed to procedures for producing, exchanging, and using discovery material, and the court found good cause for issuing an appropriately tailored order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c).

Confidentiality Designations

A party or non-party may designate discovery material as “Confidential” when it reasonably and in good faith determines that the material contains a trade secret, proprietary business information, competitively or financially sensitive information, or other sensitive non-public information whose disclosure could harm the designating party’s business or the business of its customers or clients. Ordinary discovery material must be marked when produced. Deposition transcripts may be designated on the record or by written notice identifying particular pages, lines, or exhibits within 30 days after the deposition. During that 30-day period, the entire transcript is treated as confidential.

A producing party or non-party may correct an earlier failure to designate material before trial by notifying prior recipients and, for material other than deposition transcripts, reproducing it with the proper designation. The order also initially treats documents marked confidential as “Attorney’s Eyes’ Only” until the court enters the protective order, while reserving Hyper’s right to seek modification of that provision if it causes prejudice or unreasonable delay.

Permitted Disclosures and Use

Confidential discovery material may be disclosed to the parties, their insurers and insurer counsel, counsel working on the case and their staff, litigation-support vendors, mediators or arbitrators, the document’s author or addressee, potential witnesses, experts and other specialized advisers, deposition stenographers, and the court and its personnel. Mediators or arbitrators, potential witnesses, experts, and specialized advisers must first receive the order and sign the required non-disclosure agreement.

Recipients may use confidential discovery material only to prosecute or defend this action and any appeals. They may not use it for business, commercial, or competitive purposes. The order does not restrict a person’s use of that person’s own documents or information, or information obtained independently of the discovery process.

Challenges, Court Filings, and Subpoenas

A party may object to a confidentiality designation before trial by giving written notice stating the specific grounds. If the parties cannot promptly resolve the dispute, counsel must bring it to the court. A party seeking additional disclosure limits, such as an “attorneys’ eyes only” designation in extraordinary circumstances, must follow a similar procedure.

The order establishes notice procedures when discovery material is subject to confidentiality obligations owed to a third party. It also allows production in response to a lawful subpoena, other compulsory process, a legal requirement, or a government agency request, provided the recipient gives the producing person written notice before disclosure when possible. Court filings containing confidential material must follow applicable court rules, and a party filing under seal must publicly file a version redacting only the confidential material.

Disposition and Effect

The document states that the protective order is effective immediately upon execution by the parties. It survives the end of the litigation. Within 30 days after final disposition, confidential discovery material and copies must be returned to the producing person or destroyed if the producing person permits destruction. The court retains jurisdiction as needed to enforce the order or impose sanctions for contempt.

Judge Denise L. Cote signed the order with the notation “SO ORDERED.” The order addresses discovery confidentiality and does not decide the underlying claims between the parties.