PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP DANIEL 2 fener JACOB A, AOLERSTEIN CAITH RUSHNEA sBeahe aaeaon BAYER 82058, FORTUNE FI CIAL CENTE . ARF 1285 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAB unit NANGIA R TONATHAN H. ASHTOR BRIAN G. LAVIN NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019-6064 5 DONGSANHUAN ZHONGLU ROBERT A, ATKINS, KIAOYU GREG L1G CHAOYANG DISTRICT, BELJING [O0020, CHINA □□ GL MM, LORETTA E. LYNG TELEPHONE (212) 373-3000 TELEPHONE (86-£0) 8828-5300 PeTEVEN BAUGHMAN TeEFREY G, □□□□□□ CRAIG A. BENSON BIO Ww. Mayo” LLOYG K. GARRISON (146-198 19 SUITES 3801 - 2606 5 3810 JOSEPH J. BIAL ELIZABETH R, MOCOLM RANDOLPH PAUL (1946-19563 SRUGE GIRENGOIM JEAN M. MCLOUGHLIN MIRKIND {1es0.199) 36/F, GLOUCESTER TOWER H. CHRISTOPHER BOEHNING ALVARO MEMBAILLERA THE LANDMARK BRIAN SOLIN MARK F. MENOELSOHN LOUES S. WEISS (1927-950) 1 " ANGELO BONVING CLAUDINE □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ JOHN 11927-1977) 1B QUEEN'S ROAD, CENTRAL BRoWwt Wibre Wis sHorren HONG IKONG WALTER BROWN??+ CATHERINE NYARADY TELEPHONE (652) 2846-0300 SUSANNA M. BUERGEL JANE B. O'BRIEN JESSICA &S. CAREY BRAD R. OKUN on ee □□□ sone BLE □□ an BRR □□□ 10 NOBLE STREET + AR SJ. LE Oi JESSICA £. P □ WRITER'S DIREGT DIAL NUMBER LONDON EG2V 7JU, UNITED KINGDOM SANORNEG CLEARY AUETIN POLLED? Jay COHEN VALERIE E, RADWANER TELEPHONE (44 20} 7487 1600 KELLEY A. CORNISH JEFFREY J. RECHER (21 2} 373-3553 CHRISTOPHER J. CUMMINGS CARL L. REISNER THOMAS V. DE LA BASTIDE It LORIN REISNER FUROKU SEIME! SUILOING Bees DEARgORNN ae Ss, □□ □□ ao a FUEL J, OECKELB. A ALTER &, □□□□□□□□□ WRITER’S FACSIMILE 2-2 UCHISAIWAICHO 2-CHOME KAREN i, OUNN RICHARD A. ROSEN CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO 106-0011, JAPAN ALICE BELISLE EATON ANDREW N, ROSENBERG 492-0553 TELEPHONE (6173) 2697-9101 GREGORY A, EZRING JACQUELINE □□ RUBIN ROSS A. FIELDSTON CHARLES F. □□□□□□ RULE* ANDREW C, FINCH RAPHAEL M. RUSSO WRITER'S DIRECT E-MALL ADDRESS TORONTO-DOMINION CENFRE ghar ep OAitoaae □□ □□□□□□□□□□ buerge!@paul iss.com 77 KING STREET WEST, SUITE 3100 ROBERTO FiNZL JEFFREY □□□□□□□ @ WelSS. PO, BOX 226 PETER E. FIS □ SCHNEIDE HARRIS FISCHMAN ROBERT B. SCHUMER Treniohe cies pod-o820 HeTOHIA'S. RORRESTER BRIAN SCRIVAN j | . RIAN SC: TELEPHONE (416) BOd-0220 HARRIS B. FREIDUS KYLE T SEIPRIED CHRISTOBHER D. FREY KAHNGN □□□□□□□□□ Ss. FRE LL . iF 2001 K STREET. NW enh Ew L SAINES ARORA geuare = . GAL . WASHINGTON, DC 20006-1047 MICHAEL E, GERTZMAN SARAH STASNY TELEPHONE (202) 223-7300 ADAM MH. GIVERTZ TARUN MM. STEWART SALVATORE GOGLIOAMELLA ERIC ALAN STONE MATTHEW 2, GOLDSTEIN BRET TANENBAUM 500 DELAWARE AVENUE, SUITE 206 ROBEATO 2. GONZALEZ! RIGHARG G, TARLOWE rosvornice soxse ERIE COA ENTE A □□□□□ c ICA i. Aueust 15 9023 WILMINGTON, DE 19899-0032 ANDREW GORCON DAMIEL J. TOAL fu ) TELEPHONE (302) 685-4410 BRIAN 5. GRIEVE LAURA GC. TURANO GD] GROFMAN CONRAD VAN LOGGERENBERG NICHOLAS GROGOMBRIDGE HRISHANA VEERARAGHAVAN BRUCE A. GUTENPLAN JEREMY M. VEIT MELE DA HAAG* LIZA M, VELAZGUER ALAN 3S. HALPERIN MICHAEL YOGEL CLAUDIA HAMMERMAN AAMY J. WAHSEH BRIAN □□□ HERMANN JOHN WEBER JOSHUA HILL LAWRENCE S, WEE MICHELE HIRSHMAN THEODORE V. WELLS, JR. JARRETT R. HOFFMAN LINDSEY L, WIERSMA ROBERT BE. HOLO STEVEN J. WILLIAMS DAVID 5S. HUNTINGTON LAWRENCE □□ □□□□□□□□□□□□ AMRAN HUSSEIN AUSTIN WITE LORETTA A. IPPOLITO HARK B. WLAZLO WILLIAM 4. ISAACSON* □□□ WOLLSTELN JAREN JANGHORBANI JULIA TARVER MASON WOOD BRIAN i. JANSON JENNIFER He WU JEH ©. JOHNSON BETTY YAP* BRAD 5. KARP JORDAN E. YARETT PATRICK N. KARSNITZ KAYE N, YOSHING SOHN ©. BENNEDY TONG Vis BRIAN Kitt TRACEY A, ZACCONE KYLE J. SIMPLER TAURIE M, ZEITZER SLExl PUL BeREEnG 7 ROBERT □□□□□□□□□□□ JR. . : Via ECF ANGT ADHITTED TO THE NEW YORK BAR *ADMUFIED ONLY TO FRE CALIFOREIA BAR Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer, United States District Judge : United States District Court ca Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007
Re: Jn re: Morgan Stanley Data Security Litigation, 1:20-cv-5914 (PAE) ‘ : . We represent Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC in connection with the toe . above-referenced matter. We write jointly with Settlement Class Counsel, Nussbaum Law . . ; os Group and Morgan & Morgan. Pursuant to Rule 4.B of this Court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, and consistent with the letter motion filed February 15, 2023 (ECF ‘ : No. 203), the March 14, 2023 Letter submitted to this Court (ECF No. 208), the May 15,
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 2023 Letter submitted to this Court (ECF No. 210), and as we discussed on the record during the August 5, 2022 settlement approval hearing, we respectfully request leave to publicly file a redacted copy of the third quarterly status update report of the work completed to date by Kroll Inc. (the “Third Kroll Report”), given the sensitive personal and confidential information contained therein, In the Second Circuit, there exists a rebuttable presumption of public access for any “judicial documents” filed with the court. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Simply because a paper is filed with the court does not make it a “judicial document,” but rather the document must be “relevant to the performance of the judicial function” or useful in the judicial process. /d. at 119. Where a document is found to be a judicial document, but is not necessary for some kind of dispositive determination, the standard to rebut that presumption of public access and to sustain redactions is lower. See Kewazinga Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., 2021 WL 1222122, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2021). Two of the kinds of values that may justify the sealing or redaction of documents include protecting privacy interests of third parties or other sensitive information such as proprietary commercial information. See Church & Dwight Co. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics GmbH, 2018 WL 4253181, at *2 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 5, 2018) (finding proposed redactions in post-trial submissions appropriate when narrowly tailored to protect proprietary and competitively sensitive information, including information that the parties were contractually obligated to keep confidential); £.2.0.C. v. Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, 2012 WL 691545, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar, 2, 2012) (noting acceptable justifications for redactions include privacy interests of innocent third parties); Standard & Poor's Corp. v. Commodity Exch., Inc., 541 F. Supp. 1273, 1277 (S.D.N.Y.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 1982) (finding limited redactions justified where redactions were tailored to protecting party’s commercial information, including index-rendering methodology, and in order to avoid potential harassment or disruptions that could prevent the relevant analysts from performing their jobs properly). Here, the Third Kroll Report is not a submission in support of a dispositive motion, for which the most conservative approach would be warranted. As a result, the report is a judicial document subject to a lower presumption of public access. Nonetheless, the Third Kroll Report is “relevant to the performance of the judicial function”: the Court ordered the parties to submit quarterly reports to ensure compliance with the settlement agreement, With that purpose in mind, the parties endeavored to narrowly tailor their redactions to the Third Kroll Report so that Settlement Class Members who may review the publicly available version can generally understand the steps that Kroll has undertaken to recover decommissioned devices and the success of those efforts, Specifically, the redactions obscure the details regarding Kroll’s communications with certain downstream purchasers of the decommissioned drives at issue, which includes the personal identifiable information (“PII”) of those downstream purchasers.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP DANIEL 2 fener JACOB A, AOLERSTEIN CAITH RUSHNEA sBeahe aaeaon BAYER 82058, FORTUNE FI CIAL CENTE . ARF 1285 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAB unit NANGIA R TONATHAN H. ASHTOR BRIAN G. LAVIN NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019-6064 5 DONGSANHUAN ZHONGLU ROBERT A, ATKINS, KIAOYU GREG L1G CHAOYANG DISTRICT, BELJING [O0020, CHINA □□ GL MM, LORETTA E. LYNG TELEPHONE (212) 373-3000 TELEPHONE (86-£0) 8828-5300 PeTEVEN BAUGHMAN TeEFREY G, □□□□□□ CRAIG A. BENSON BIO Ww. Mayo” LLOYG K. GARRISON (146-198 19 SUITES 3801 - 2606 5 3810 JOSEPH J. BIAL ELIZABETH R, MOCOLM RANDOLPH PAUL (1946-19563 SRUGE GIRENGOIM JEAN M. MCLOUGHLIN MIRKIND {1es0.199) 36/F, GLOUCESTER TOWER H. CHRISTOPHER BOEHNING ALVARO MEMBAILLERA THE LANDMARK BRIAN SOLIN MARK F. MENOELSOHN LOUES S. WEISS (1927-950) 1 " ANGELO BONVING CLAUDINE □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ JOHN 11927-1977) 1B QUEEN'S ROAD, CENTRAL BRoWwt Wibre Wis sHorren HONG IKONG WALTER BROWN??+ CATHERINE NYARADY TELEPHONE (652) 2846-0300 SUSANNA M. BUERGEL JANE B. O'BRIEN JESSICA &S. CAREY BRAD R. OKUN on ee □□□ sone BLE □□ an BRR □□□ 10 NOBLE STREET + AR SJ. LE Oi JESSICA £. P □ WRITER'S DIREGT DIAL NUMBER LONDON EG2V 7JU, UNITED KINGDOM SANORNEG CLEARY AUETIN POLLED? Jay COHEN VALERIE E, RADWANER TELEPHONE (44 20} 7487 1600 KELLEY A. CORNISH JEFFREY J. RECHER (21 2} 373-3553 CHRISTOPHER J. CUMMINGS CARL L. REISNER THOMAS V. DE LA BASTIDE It LORIN REISNER FUROKU SEIME! SUILOING Bees DEARgORNN ae Ss, □□ □□ ao a FUEL J, OECKELB. A ALTER &, □□□□□□□□□ WRITER’S FACSIMILE 2-2 UCHISAIWAICHO 2-CHOME KAREN i, OUNN RICHARD A. ROSEN CHIYODA-KU, TOKYO 106-0011, JAPAN ALICE BELISLE EATON ANDREW N, ROSENBERG 492-0553 TELEPHONE (6173) 2697-9101 GREGORY A, EZRING JACQUELINE □□ RUBIN ROSS A. FIELDSTON CHARLES F. □□□□□□ RULE* ANDREW C, FINCH RAPHAEL M. RUSSO WRITER'S DIRECT E-MALL ADDRESS TORONTO-DOMINION CENFRE ghar ep OAitoaae □□ □□□□□□□□□□ buerge!@paul iss.com 77 KING STREET WEST, SUITE 3100 ROBERTO FiNZL JEFFREY □□□□□□□ @ WelSS. PO, BOX 226 PETER E. FIS □ SCHNEIDE HARRIS FISCHMAN ROBERT B. SCHUMER Treniohe cies pod-o820 HeTOHIA'S. RORRESTER BRIAN SCRIVAN j | . RIAN SC: TELEPHONE (416) BOd-0220 HARRIS B. FREIDUS KYLE T SEIPRIED CHRISTOBHER D. FREY KAHNGN □□□□□□□□□ Ss. FRE LL . iF 2001 K STREET. NW enh Ew L SAINES ARORA geuare = . GAL . WASHINGTON, DC 20006-1047 MICHAEL E, GERTZMAN SARAH STASNY TELEPHONE (202) 223-7300 ADAM MH. GIVERTZ TARUN MM. STEWART SALVATORE GOGLIOAMELLA ERIC ALAN STONE MATTHEW 2, GOLDSTEIN BRET TANENBAUM 500 DELAWARE AVENUE, SUITE 206 ROBEATO 2. GONZALEZ! RIGHARG G, TARLOWE rosvornice soxse ERIE COA ENTE A □□□□□ c ICA i. Aueust 15 9023 WILMINGTON, DE 19899-0032 ANDREW GORCON DAMIEL J. TOAL fu ) TELEPHONE (302) 685-4410 BRIAN 5. GRIEVE LAURA GC. TURANO GD] GROFMAN CONRAD VAN LOGGERENBERG NICHOLAS GROGOMBRIDGE HRISHANA VEERARAGHAVAN BRUCE A. GUTENPLAN JEREMY M. VEIT MELE DA HAAG* LIZA M, VELAZGUER ALAN 3S. HALPERIN MICHAEL YOGEL CLAUDIA HAMMERMAN AAMY J. WAHSEH BRIAN □□□ HERMANN JOHN WEBER JOSHUA HILL LAWRENCE S, WEE MICHELE HIRSHMAN THEODORE V. WELLS, JR. JARRETT R. HOFFMAN LINDSEY L, WIERSMA ROBERT BE. HOLO STEVEN J. WILLIAMS DAVID 5S. HUNTINGTON LAWRENCE □□ □□□□□□□□□□□□ AMRAN HUSSEIN AUSTIN WITE LORETTA A. IPPOLITO HARK B. WLAZLO WILLIAM 4. ISAACSON* □□□ WOLLSTELN JAREN JANGHORBANI JULIA TARVER MASON WOOD BRIAN i. JANSON JENNIFER He WU JEH ©. JOHNSON BETTY YAP* BRAD 5. KARP JORDAN E. YARETT PATRICK N. KARSNITZ KAYE N, YOSHING SOHN ©. BENNEDY TONG Vis BRIAN Kitt TRACEY A, ZACCONE KYLE J. SIMPLER TAURIE M, ZEITZER SLExl PUL BeREEnG 7 ROBERT □□□□□□□□□□□ JR. . : Via ECF ANGT ADHITTED TO THE NEW YORK BAR *ADMUFIED ONLY TO FRE CALIFOREIA BAR Hon. Paul A. Engelmayer, United States District Judge : United States District Court ca Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007
Re: Jn re: Morgan Stanley Data Security Litigation, 1:20-cv-5914 (PAE) ‘ : . We represent Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC in connection with the toe . above-referenced matter. We write jointly with Settlement Class Counsel, Nussbaum Law . . ; os Group and Morgan & Morgan. Pursuant to Rule 4.B of this Court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, and consistent with the letter motion filed February 15, 2023 (ECF ‘ : No. 203), the March 14, 2023 Letter submitted to this Court (ECF No. 208), the May 15,
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 2023 Letter submitted to this Court (ECF No. 210), and as we discussed on the record during the August 5, 2022 settlement approval hearing, we respectfully request leave to publicly file a redacted copy of the third quarterly status update report of the work completed to date by Kroll Inc. (the “Third Kroll Report”), given the sensitive personal and confidential information contained therein, In the Second Circuit, there exists a rebuttable presumption of public access for any “judicial documents” filed with the court. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). Simply because a paper is filed with the court does not make it a “judicial document,” but rather the document must be “relevant to the performance of the judicial function” or useful in the judicial process. /d. at 119. Where a document is found to be a judicial document, but is not necessary for some kind of dispositive determination, the standard to rebut that presumption of public access and to sustain redactions is lower. See Kewazinga Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., 2021 WL 1222122, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2021). Two of the kinds of values that may justify the sealing or redaction of documents include protecting privacy interests of third parties or other sensitive information such as proprietary commercial information. See Church & Dwight Co. v. SPD Swiss Precision Diagnostics GmbH, 2018 WL 4253181, at *2 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 5, 2018) (finding proposed redactions in post-trial submissions appropriate when narrowly tailored to protect proprietary and competitively sensitive information, including information that the parties were contractually obligated to keep confidential); £.2.0.C. v. Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, 2012 WL 691545, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar, 2, 2012) (noting acceptable justifications for redactions include privacy interests of innocent third parties); Standard & Poor's Corp. v. Commodity Exch., Inc., 541 F. Supp. 1273, 1277 (S.D.N.Y.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 1982) (finding limited redactions justified where redactions were tailored to protecting party’s commercial information, including index-rendering methodology, and in order to avoid potential harassment or disruptions that could prevent the relevant analysts from performing their jobs properly). Here, the Third Kroll Report is not a submission in support of a dispositive motion, for which the most conservative approach would be warranted. As a result, the report is a judicial document subject to a lower presumption of public access. Nonetheless, the Third Kroll Report is “relevant to the performance of the judicial function”: the Court ordered the parties to submit quarterly reports to ensure compliance with the settlement agreement, With that purpose in mind, the parties endeavored to narrowly tailor their redactions to the Third Kroll Report so that Settlement Class Members who may review the publicly available version can generally understand the steps that Kroll has undertaken to recover decommissioned devices and the success of those efforts, Specifically, the redactions obscure the details regarding Kroll’s communications with certain downstream purchasers of the decommissioned drives at issue, which includes the personal identifiable information (“PII”) of those downstream purchasers. The redactions are intended to both shield the privacy of the downstream purchasers and avoid sharing information that could potentially assist a malicious actor in finding and acquiring NetApp devices before Kroll is able to locate them.
Respectfully submitted, /s/ Susanna M. Buergel Susanna M. Buergel
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP Jane Baek O’Brien Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharten & Garrison, LLP Counsel for Defendant Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC /s/ Linda P. Nussbaum Linda P. Nussbaum Nussbaum Law Group, P.C. /s/ Jean Martin Jean Martin Morgan & Morgan Settlement Class Counsel
ce: All counsel of record via ECF
The Court finds that the redactions are no greater than necessary to protect the purchasers' privacy interests and prevent obstruction of Kroll's investigation, Accordingly, the Court approves the filing of the redacted report. SO ORDERED. 4 . f BALA A. EA in “a, PAUL A, ENGELMA United States District Judge August 17, 2023