Connolly v. Deutsche Bank AG

Nature of the Order

The court entered a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), which allows a court to limit discovery to protect against improper disclosure or use of sensitive information. The order applies to documents and information exchanged during the pretrial phase of Connolly v. Deutsche Bank AG.

The order also addresses possible coordination of discovery with the related state-court action identified in the order as the Black Action. Protected information may be used in that action only if the applicable receiving party is bound by this protective order or signs the attached agreement, and agrees to a joint deposition protocol for depositions in both actions.

Confidentiality Categories and Permitted Use

Counsel may designate material as “CONFIDENTIAL” when, in good faith, the designation is needed to protect proprietary, trade-secret, or other sensitive nonpublic information. Counsel may designate material as “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” when disclosure could harm a party’s business or its customers or clients, or create a substantial risk of serious harm that less restrictive measures could not avoid.

Protected material may be used only in connection with this action, subject to the order’s provisions allowing certain use in the Black Action. The order lists permitted recipients, including counsel and necessary litigation staff; consultants, experts, contractors, and document-processing vendors; the court; deposition stenographers and videographers; and actual or potential witnesses when disclosure is reasonably necessary. Highly confidential material generally has more limited access because the order does not include the requesting party itself among the listed recipients.

Before disclosure, counsel must explain the material’s confidential nature and the order’s use and disclosure restrictions. Certain recipients must also agree to be bound by the order or sign the attached agreement. A party may challenge another party’s confidentiality designation after counsel first makes a good-faith effort to resolve the dispute.

Additional Protections

The order requires personally identifying information, such as Social Security numbers, financial account numbers, passwords, and information that could be used for identity theft, to be stored securely and shared only with authorized individuals.

It also provides that producing privileged or attorney-work-product-protected documents, electronically stored information, or other information—whether accidentally or otherwise—does not waive the applicable protection in this case or another federal or state proceeding. At the end of the later-ending action, protected material and copies must be returned or certified as destroyed, subject to the order’s stated deadline after final judgment no longer subject to further appeal.

Sealing and Court’s Determination

The order states that labeling material confidential does not create a presumption that it may be filed under seal or in redacted form. The parties must follow the court’s procedures for requesting permission to seal or redact filings. The order also states that the court did not determine, document by document, that the information is confidential; any such determination would be made later under the court’s procedures and the presumption favoring public access to judicial documents.

Disposition

The court ordered the parties to follow the protective-order restrictions. The opinion does not resolve the underlying claims between Matthew Connolly and Deutsche Bank AG, and it does not decide whether particular documents are ultimately confidential or admissible.