Dual North America, Inc. v. Kearns

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided November 29, 2023·No. 1:23-cv-08918·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DUAL NORTH AMERICA, INC., Case No. 23-cv-8918 (JMF)(SDA) Plaintiff,

v. JOINT CONFIDENTIALITY DENNIS KEARNS, PATRICK DARRAGH, AGREEMENT AND ORDER DANIEL SIMNOWITZ, and AVESI PARTNERS, LLC, Defendants. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties and any other persons or entities who become bound by this Order by signifying their assent through execution of Exhibit A hereto that the following Joint Confidentiality Agreement and Order (the “Order”) shall govern the handling of confidential and proprietary information produced by any party (the “Producing Party”) during this litigation, any related proceedings and/or appeals therefrom, if any (the “Litigation”). 1. This Order applies to all information, documents, and things exchanged in or subject to discovery that are produced or otherwise provided in the Litigation, either by a party or a non-party, to any other party or non-party, in response to or in connection with any discovery requests or subpoenas. 2. This Order also applies to any non-parties that are served with subpoenas for documents or depositions in connection with the Litigation, and all such non-parties are entitled to the protection afforded hereby and subject to the obligations contained herein upon their execution of Exhibit A hereto. 3. In responding to a request for discovery or a subpoena, the Producing Party may designate as “Confidential” any documents, information, or deposition testimony that it believes in good faith contain (i) non-public business information, including but not limited to financial information, personnel information, client information, or other proprietary business information

or trade secrets, (ii) non-public personal information, or (iii) information implicating a legitimate expectation of privacy concerning social security numbers, sensitive financial information, or other proprietary information. All of the foregoing categories of information are collectively referred to as “Confidential Material.” A Producing Party that designates material as “Confidential” is referred to as a “Designating Party.” 4. In responding to a request for discovery or a subpoena, the Producing Party may designate as “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” or “AEO” any documents, information, or deposition testimony that it believes in good faith contain trade secrets or that would otherwise create a substantial risk of serious financial or other injury that cannot be avoided by less restrictive means. Such information is referred to as “AEO Material.” A Producing Party that designates

material as “AEO Material” is referred to as a “Designating Party.” 5. Any party or non-party shall have a right to designate as “Confidential” or “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” or “AEO” documents or information provided by another party or non- party if the documents or information originated with or were created by the Designating Party, or contain Confidential or AEO Material, as defined herein, concerning the Designating Party. 6. The parties shall, in good faith, use Confidential and AEO Material solely for the purposes of preparing for and conducting the Litigation, but for no other purpose. 7. The designation of material as Confidential or AEO Material for purposes of this Order shall be made in the following manner: a. in the case of documents, exhibits, briefs, memoranda, or other materials (apart from depositions or other pretrial testimony): by stamping “Confidential” or “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” or “AEO” on each page of any material containing any such material; and b. in the case of depositions or other pretrial testimony: (i) by a statement on

the record during the deposition that a question calls for Confidential or Attorneys’ Eyes Only information, in which case the reporter will mark the relevant testimony as “Confidential [or Attorneys’ Eyes Only] Information Governed by Protective Order”; (ii) by stamping “Confidential” or “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” on any page of the deposition transcript to be so designated and marking the cover of the transcript with “THIS DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL [or ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY] Material”; or (iii) in any manner agreed to in advance by both parties and, if applicable, a non-party. If there is disagreement as to the appropriateness of the requested designation, the parties and, if applicable, a non-party are required to follow the protocol set forth below in Paragraph 9, with the “Producing Party” being the party requesting the designation of testimony as Confidential or

Attorneys’ Eyes Only and the objecting party being the equivalent of the “Receiving Party.” 8. If the Receiving Party has an objection to a Confidential or Attorneys’ Eyes Only designation, the Receiving Party shall notify the Producing Party of its objection. The notification must be in writing and must detail the basis for such objection. After receiving the notification, if the Producing Party continues to believe that the information and/or documents should retain its designation, the Producing Party shall notify the Receiving Party within five (5) business days of their continued disagreement and the Receiving Party shall then have five (5) business days after sending this final notification (or a longer period of time if the parties agree or via Court Order) to seek an Order from the Court stating that the material is not entitled to its designation. The information and/or documents shall be treated as they are designated until a decision by the Court that re-designates them. 9. Confidential Material may be disclosed, summarized, or otherwise communicated in whole or in part by the parties receiving said information only to the following persons, who

may make use of such information only in connection with the Litigation: a. Outside counsel who represent parties in the litigation, in-house counsel for the parties, and employees of counsel; b. Officers, directors, partners, or employees of any party or their affiliates hereto who are performing duties in connection with the Litigation; c. Experts or consultants assisting the parties who have signed Exhibit A; d. Potential or anticipated witness or deponents and their counsel who have signed Exhibit A; e. Court reporters and videographers who have signed Exhibit A; and f. The Court and its support personnel.

10. AEO Material may be disclosed, summarized, or otherwise communicated in whole or in part by the parties receiving said information only to the following persons, who may make use of such information in connection with the Litigation: a. Outside counsel who represent parties in the litigation and employees of counsel; b. Experts or consultants assisting the parties who have signed Exhibit A, but, as to industry and liability experts, only upon written permission of the Producing Party; c. Potential or anticipated witness or deponents and their counsel who have signed Exhibit A, but only upon written permission of the Producing Party; d. Court reporters and videographers who have signed Exhibit A; and e. The Court and its support personnel. 11. Before the Receiving Party or its counsel may show or disclose Confidential Material or AEO Material to any witness, expert, or consultant, that witness, expert, or

consultant shall be provided a copy of this Order. Such persons shall be required to confirm their understanding and agreement to abide by the terms of this Order by signing a copy of Exhibit A hereto, which copy shall be maintained by the party retaining the expert or consultant or who is examining or interviewing the witness. If a witness refuses to execute a copy of Exhibit A attached hereto, then the Receiving Party shall seek and obtain either a written agreement from all parties and, if applicable, a non-party in advance or appropriate relief from the Court prior to showing or disclosing the Confidential or AEO Material to such witness.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Dual North America, Inc. v. Kearns, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Dual North America, Inc. v. Kearns (Dual North America, Inc. v. Kearns) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga
435 F.3d 110 (Second Circuit, 2006)