Nike, Inc. v. Stockx LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:22-cv-00983
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nike v. StockX, Judge Caproni approved filing redacted expert-evidence motions and exhibits under seal by October 20.
Nike, Inc. and StockX LLC, whose motions and supporting materials were subject to the approved sealing schedule.
What happened
Nike, Inc. v. StockX LLC involved the parties’ joint request concerning their motions to exclude proposed expert testimony. The parties said those motions relied on confidential materials, including expert reports and deposition transcripts.
Nike and StockX asked to file portions of the motions and exhibits under seal, with redacted public versions where appropriate. They also proposed exchanging redactions by October 18 and filing final redactions and a motion to seal by October 20.
Judge Valerie E. Caproni granted the application and ordered that the parties’ proposed redactions and motion to seal were due October 20, 2023. The order did not decide the expert-testimony motions themselves.
The detailed version
- Nike, Inc. v. Stockx LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00983
- Valerie Caproni
- Oct. 16, 2023
Background
Nike, Inc. and StockX LLC jointly submitted a letter about sealing materials connected to their motions to exclude proposed expert testimony. The parties said each motion cited material designated confidential under the case’s stipulated protective order, including expert reports and expert-deposition transcripts.
The Request
The parties asked the Court to approve a schedule allowing them to review each other’s motions and exhibits, identify proposed redactions, and consult with their clients about confidential treatment. They proposed exchanging redactions by October 18, 2023, and filing final proposed redactions under seal by October 20, 2023, together with a publicly filed brief explaining why sealing was justified.
Ruling
The Court granted the application. Judge Valerie E. Caproni stated that the parties’ proposed redactions and motion to seal were due October 20, 2023. The order addressed the filing and sealing schedule; it did not rule on the parties’ underlying motions to exclude expert testimony.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.