Chandler v. International Business Machines Corp.

Opinion

LiUHili BAN @®© Liv Ss - KRIVURDVAWN, FY’. HAROLD L, LICHTEN* ATTORNEYS AT LAW SHANNON LISS-RIORDAN** SARAH SCHALMAN-BERGEN* 729 BOYLSTON STREET, SUITE 2000 .LLRLAW.COM MATTHEW W, THOMSON* BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02116 ADELAIDE H, PAGANO™ —— TUOMAS P FOWLER™ TELEPHONE 617-994-5800 OLENA SAVYTSKA* FACSIMILE 617-994-5801 x ADMITTED IN MASSACHUSETTS ANNE KRAMER Samrat enn 4 ADMITTED IN CALIFORNIA MICHELLE CASSORLA*™*4 A a plc. “L AA tod Caled Hee 0 ADMITTED IN NEW YORK ZACHARY RUBIN*** Of 2 pve £ wa w ADMITTED IN PENNSYLVANIA ANASTASIA DOHERTY* oy fete CHAE AX, Lb ‘4 ADMITTED IN NEW JERSEY TARA BOGHOSIAN* Cup)? oi the Oe + ADMITTED IN CONNECTICUT MATTHEW PATTON* Ub if ‘ □ A , 4 ADMITTED IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA KRYSTEN CONNON** wee “a iM teL Mig hinte.fi a ADMITTED It TENNESSEE BENJAMIN J. WEBER* OF COUNSEL a > 5 1 - . Ak cto age be por nly pete COS oper 7, 2024 Be ELA, LO VIA CM/ECF PO OYAPED OC hele Hon. John G. Koeltl OS Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse “~~ i pid 500 Pearl St. DAS New York, NY 10007-1312 / 15/3) RE: William Chandler v. International Business Machines Corp., C.A. No. 1:21- cv-06319 Dear Judge Koeitl: represent Plaintiffs in the above-referenced matters. Pursuant to Your Honor’s Individual Rule VI(A)(2), Plaintiffs seek permission to file their Motion for Summary Judgment under seal, along with the accompanying Declaration of Shannon Liss- Riordan and exhibits. . The reason for this request is that these documents contain information that falls under the scope of the confidentiality agreement contained within IBM's arbitration agreements (see Exhibit 2 to Liss-Riordan Dec!I.), which is the subject of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment. As explained extensively in the Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiffs do not believe that IBM’s confidentiality provision in its arbitration agreement should be enforced. Plaintiffs further believe that these documents be publicly filed. In particular, Plaintiffs note that Your Honor’s Individual Rule 7(B) states in relevant part that: “In general, the parties’ consent or the fact that information is subject to a confidentiality agreement between litigants is not, by itself, a valid basis to overcome the presumption in favor of public access to judicial government.” (citing In re Gen. Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litig., No. 14-MD-2543 (JMF), 2015 WL 4750774, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2015). Nevertheless, until IBM has had the opportunity to respond, and the Court has had the opportunity to consider the parties’ arguments regarding confidentiality, Plaintiffs request that, at least preliminarily, these documents be permitted to be filed under seal.

LiCH GFN @G@ Lise -RIURUAIN, FAX.

Sincerely, isi Shannon Liss-Riordan Shannon Liss-Riordan Attorney for Plaintiffs

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE hereby certify that on October 7, 2021, a true and accurate copy of the foregoing document was filed via this Court's CM/ECF system.

/si Shannon Liss-Riordan Shannon Liss-Riordan