Chabak v. Somnia, Inc.
- Philip Halpern
- 7:22-cv-09341
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 10
In Chabak v. Somnia, Judge Halpern approved a protective order governing confidential information exchanged during discovery.
The plaintiffs, defendants, their counsel and representatives, experts, consultants, witnesses, vendors, third parties providing discovery, and other persons subject to the protective order.
What happened
Chabak v. Somnia involves plaintiffs and defendants who jointly requested a confidentiality order for nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be exchanged during discovery.
The order limits what information may be labeled confidential, restricts who may receive it, and requires safeguards for disclosure, court filings, and accidentally disclosed privileged material. It also limits use of confidential information to this lawsuit and related appeals.
Judge Halpern ordered the parties and other covered persons to follow the protective order, which remains effective after the litigation ends and allows the court to enforce it and impose contempt sanctions.
The detailed version
- Chabak v. Somnia, Inc. · No. 7:22-cv-09341
- Philip Halpern
- Apr. 7, 2023
Nature of the Order
The court entered a stipulated confidentiality and protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The parties, through counsel, requested the order to protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored order governing the pretrial phase of the action.
Confidential Information
A producing party may designate only portions of discovery material that it reasonably and in good faith believes contain specified types of information, including previously undisclosed financial information, information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company, business or marketing plans, and personal or intimate information. The court may later grant confidential status to other categories.
The order establishes procedures for marking documents and deposition testimony as confidential. It also permits a producing party to correct an earlier failure to designate information as confidential by notifying prior recipients in writing.
Disclosure and Use Limits
People subject to the order may disclose confidential discovery material only to listed categories of recipients, including the parties, insurers, counsel, certain vendors, mediators or arbitrators, document authors or recipients, potential witnesses, experts, deposition stenographers, and the court. Some recipients must first receive the order and sign a nondisclosure agreement.
Confidential material may be used only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals. It may not be used for business, commercial, competitive, or other litigation purposes. Covered persons must take reasonable precautions against unauthorized or accidental disclosure, and the order provides that the inadvertent disclosure of attorney-client privileged or attorney-work-product material does not by itself waive that protection.
Court Filings and Sealing
A party seeking to file documents under seal must also file a letter brief and supporting declaration providing a particularized justification. The order states that the court may deny confidential treatment for material submitted in connection with motions or other proceedings and is unlikely to seal material introduced as evidence at trial.
End of the Case and Enforcement
Within 60 days after final disposition of the action, including appeals, recipients generally must return or, with the producing party’s permission, destroy confidential discovery material and certify that they have retained no copies or summaries. Counsel may keep certain archival case files, but those materials remain subject to the order.
The order survives termination of the litigation. The court retains jurisdiction over persons subject to it as necessary to enforce its obligations or impose contempt sanctions. The court therefore approved the stipulated protective order; the opinion does not decide the underlying claims or defenses.
Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.