Joao v. Epic Systems Corporation

• Court: District Court, S.D. New York
• Decided: March 5, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00857
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

Quarles & Brady LLP Attorneys at Law 33 East Main Street Suite 900 Madison, Wisconsin 53703 608-251-5000 Fax 608-251-9166 quarles.com Writer's Direct Dial: 608-283-2608 E-Mail: Bryce.Loken@quarles.com March 4, 2025

VIA CM/ECF The Honorable Jesse M. Furman United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, NY 10007 RE: Raymond A. Joao v. Epic Systems Corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-00857-JMF Letter Motion for Leave to File Document in Redacted Form Dear Judge Furman: In accordance with Rule 7.C. of the Court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, Standing Order 19-MC-583, and Section 6 of the S.D.N.Y. Electronic Case Filing Rules and Instructions, Defendant Epic Systems Corporation respectfully seeks leave to file in redacted form (1) Epic’s Reply in Support of Motion to Transfer; and (2) Exhibit A to the Declaration of Bryce A. Loken in Support of Epic’s Reply. The information Epic seeks to redact from its Reply Brief and Exhibit A contain testimony from the February 25, 2025 deposition of Raymond A. Joao, taken in connection with Epic Sys. Corp. v. Decapolis Systems, LLC, Case No. 9:22-cv-80173 (S.D. Fla.). Pursuant to Rule 7.C.1. of the Court’s Individual Rules, Epic conferred with Plaintiff Joao concerning Epic’s intention to cite to and file portions of the transcript. Plaintiff Joao has designated 277:18-278:9 and 280:19- 281:17 as RESTRICTED-ATTORNEYS’ EYES ONLY and 279:22—280:12 as CONFIDENTIAL pursuant to the Stipulated Protective Order entered in the Florida action, a copy of which 1s enclosed. On February 28, 2025, pursuant to Rule 7.C.i., the undersigned counsel informed Plaintiff Joao’s counsel of the Court’s requirement that Plaintiff file, within three business days, a letter explaining the need to seal or redact the aforementioned testimony.

Chicago Denver ¢ Indianapolis □□ Madison « Milwaukee « Minneapolis « Naples « Phoenix « St. Louis « San Diego * Tampa □ Tucson « Washington, D.C.

The Honorable Jesse M. Furman March 4, 2025 Page 2

We thank the Court for its attention to this matter and are happy to address any questions the Court may have.

motion to seal is granted temporarily. That said, Respectfully submitted, agreement between the parties to keep a document is not sufficient to keep a “judicial sealed or redacted. See, e.g., United States v. ofe— Wells Fargo Bank N.A., No. 12-CV-7527 (JMF), 2015 □ 3999074, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. June 30, 2015) (citing Thus, if any party believes that the materials at Bryce A. Loken (Pro hac vice) should remain sealed or redacted, that party shall Kristin Graham Noel (Pro hac vice) a letter brief, within three days and not to exceed Matthew J. Duchemin (Pro hac vice) pages, showing why doing so is consistent with the QUARLES & BRADY LLP . 33 East Main Street, Suite 900 in favor of public access to judicial Madison. WI 53703 See generally Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Tel: (608) 251-5000 Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006). kristin noel@quarles.com matthew.duchemin@quarles.com Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 26. pig e.loken@quarles.com SO ORDERED. Mitchell D. Cohen VEDDERPRICE 1633 Broadway, 31% Floor New York, NY 10019 March 5, 2025 Tel.: (212) 407-6980 mcohen@vedderprice.com Attorneys for Defendant [Enclosure]

□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□