Gucci America, Inc. v. Century 21 USA, LLC
- Gregory Woods
- 1:23-cv-10247
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 11
In Gucci America v. Century 21 USA, Judge Cott entered a stipulated protective order governing confidential discovery.
The parties, their officers, agents, employees, attorneys, other persons acting with them, and anyone with actual notice of the order who receives or accesses designated confidential discovery material.
What happened
Gucci America, Inc. v. Century 21 USA LLC involved the parties’ agreed request for an order protecting nonpublic and competitively sensitive information exchanged during discovery. The opinion identifies Gucci America, Inc. as the plaintiff and Century 21 USA LLC, Century 21 Department Stores, LLC, and Does 1–10 as defendants.
The order limits disclosure of information marked confidential, including certain financial information, business plans, personal information, and other categories approved by the court. It allows disclosure to specified people, such as the parties, lawyers, experts, witnesses, and the court, under stated conditions. It also establishes procedures for challenging confidentiality designations, filing confidential material under seal, protecting personal identifying information, handling inadvertently produced privileged material, and returning or destroying protected material after the case ends.
Judge James L. Cott found good cause and entered the stipulated confidentiality and protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). The order does not decide the confidentiality of any particular material, the admissibility of evidence, or the merits of the lawsuit, and the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the order.
The detailed version
- Gucci America, Inc. v. Century 21 USA, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-10247
- Gregory Woods
- May 2, 2024
Nature of the Order
The parties, through counsel, stipulated to a confidentiality and protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c). They asked the court to protect nonpublic and competitively sensitive information that might be disclosed during discovery. The court found good cause for an appropriately tailored order and entered it.
Information Covered
A producing party may designate as confidential only material that it reasonably and in good faith believes includes specified protected information, such as:
- Previously undisclosed financial information, including profitability reports or estimates, fees, royalty rates, guarantees, sales reports, and margins; - Previously undisclosed information about ownership or control of a nonpublic company; - Previously undisclosed business plans, product-development information, marketing plans, or other competitively sensitive business information; - Personal or intimate information about an individual; or - Another category the court later gives confidential status.
The producing party generally must mark the protected material “CONFIDENTIAL” and provide a redacted copy for future public use. Deposition testimony and exhibits have separate designation procedures, including a 30-day period after a deposition during which the entire transcript is treated as confidential.
Permitted Disclosures and Use
People subject to the order may disclose confidential discovery material only to listed recipients, including the parties and their insurers; in-house and outside counsel and their staff; vendors working on the case; mediators or arbitrators; people identified as authors or recipients of a document; potential witnesses; experts and other specialized advisers; deposition transcription services; and the court and appellate courts.
Before receiving confidential material, mediators, witnesses, experts, and certain other recipients must receive the order and sign the required nondisclosure agreement. Recipients may use confidential discovery material only to prosecute or defend this action and related appeals, not for another lawsuit or purpose.
Challenges, Court Filings, and Protection Duties
A party may object to a confidentiality designation before trial by giving written notice stating the grounds. If the dispute is not promptly resolved, the affected lawyers must bring it to the court under the court’s individual practices. A party may also request additional disclosure limits, such as an attorneys’-eyes-only designation, by following a similar process.
When confidential material is filed with the court, the parties must publicly file a redacted version and file the unredacted version under seal with the required application and supporting declaration. The order warns that the court may unseal documents if the required particularized showing is not made and that confidential treatment is unlikely for material introduced at trial.
Recipients must take reasonable precautions to prevent unauthorized or accidental disclosure. Personally identifying information must be kept secure and shared only with authorized individuals. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 502, inadvertent or other production of privileged or attorney-work-product material does not waive the privilege or protection in this case or another federal or state proceeding.
End of the Case and Enforcement
Within 60 days after final disposition, including appeals, recipients must return or destroy confidential discovery material, unless the producing party permits destruction instead of return, and must provide written certification. Lawyers specifically retained for the action may keep certain archival materials, which remain subject to the order. The order continues after the litigation ends, and the court retains jurisdiction over persons subject to it as necessary to enforce the order or impose contempt sanctions.
Disposition and Limits of the Ruling
Judge James L. Cott entered the stipulated protective order. The order governs discovery confidentiality and does not decide the merits of the parties’ claims, whether specific material is actually confidential, whether material is admissible at trial, or whether any discovery objection is valid.
Read the full 11-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.