Reed v. FedEx Freight, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas
DecidedApril 2, 2025
Docket4:24-cv-04104
StatusUnknown

This text of Reed v. FedEx Freight, Inc. (Reed v. FedEx Freight, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reed v. FedEx Freight, Inc., (W.D. Ark. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

JAMIE REED PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 4:24-cv-4104

FEDEX FREIGHT, INC. DEFENDANT

ORDER

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion for Protective Order. ECF No. 14. The parties seek a protective order to safeguard the confidentiality of discovery material shared between the parties during this action. The parties have provided their Proposed Protective Order (ECF No. 14-1) with the instant motion. Upon review, the Court finds that the parties’ Joint Motion for Protective Order (ECF No. 14) should be and is hereby GRANTED. However, the Court finds it necessary to add language to the protective order requiring that the parties seek and obtain leave of the Court prior to filing any material under seal.1 0F The Protective Order is as follows: 1. The Parties anticipate the production of confidential, proprietary, commercially sensitive and/or trade secret materials during discovery or at hearings in this case. In addition, the Parties anticipate that this case will involve the production of certain private information regarding non- parties. The Parties reasonably believe that the entry of this Protective Order is necessary and proper to: 1) protect FedEx from competitive harm in the marketplace; and 2) prevent the harm that would result from the unnecessary public dissemination of private information relating to non-

1 The Court is also altering the parties’ erroneous reference to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas in § 9 of the Proposed Protective Order. ECF No. 14, p. 7. parties or to the medical treatment of Plaintiff. The specific categories of information to be protected as well as each basis for protection are detailed below. 2. The Parties agree that this Protective Order shall govern the pre-trial disclosure and use of

information, documents, tangible materials, testimony, responses to discovery and other information (or the contents and substance thereof) produced, served, disclosed, or filed by any party or third-party deponent or witness during the course of this litigation, whether produced voluntarily pursuant to a request under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, through discovery or other proceedings, or contained in any motion, pleadings, affidavit or brief, including, without limitation, all copies, excerpts, and summaries (collectively “Material”) submitted to the Court during the course of this litigation or in connection with this action. 3. As used herein, the meanings of the following terms are defined: A. “Confidential Material” means: (1) “Trade Secrets” (as defined below in

Paragraph 3F or (2) those specific categories of documents or materials described below in Paragraph 4. B. “Designator” means one who provides, serves, discloses, or files any Non-Public Material that has been designated as “Confidential” in connection with this action. C. “Non-Public” means material that is not readily ascertainable and that which the Designator has taken reasonable steps to maintain in secrecy. To the extent that a Designator seeks protection for material that may not constitute a Trade Secret as defined below (see ¶ 3F), the parties have described categories of information with reasonable specificity and have explained why a substantial privacy interest exists in keeping those categories of information from public disclosure. These categories are described below in Paragraph 4. D. “Parties” means, and is limited to, Jamie Reed and FedEx Freight, Inc. (“FedEx”), the named parties to this lawsuit.

E. “Person” means any individual who has agreed to be bound by this Order by signing the “Agreement to Be Bound by Court’s Confidentiality Order.” A copy of this Agreement is attached as “Exhibit A.” F. “Trade Secret” means a secret meeting the definition of a “trade secret” under A.C.A. § 4-75-601(4): “Trade Secret” means information, including a formula, drawing, pattern, compilation including a customer list, program, device, method, technique or process that: (1) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (2) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.

4. The Parties have an interest in keeping documents or materials confidential if such materials contain: 1) Trade Secrets, or 2) fall within the specific categories of materials identified below that would either cause competitive injury if revealed or would needlessly subject non-parties to the annoyance, embarrassment, and undue burden of having certain private information made public. To the extent the Parties designate materials that may not constitute a Trade Secret, a specific category or categories of “Confidential” materials are described in the subparagraphs below along with an explanation of why the Parties have a privacy interest in these categories of material: A. “Marketing Strategy Documents” means Non-Public documents containing information regarding FedEx’s strategy to improve or increase market share or that disclose FedEx’s strategies and methods of selling or marketing its products or services. “Marketing Strategy Documents” could be used by competitors to disrupt or preempt FedEx’s efforts to

improve or increase its position in the marketplace. See Sullivan Mktg. v. Valassis Comm’ns, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5824, *3 (S.D.N.Y. May 5, 1994)(“pricing and marketing strategies are widely held to be confidential business information that may be subject to a protective order”). B. “Reorganization Documents” means Non-Public documents containing information regarding FedEx’s plan for, and implementation of, any relevant recent corporate reorganization. Such documents include materials containing discussion or analysis of the effect and costs of such corporate reorganization. Reorganization Documents could be used by a competitor to disrupt or preempt FedEx’s efforts to better position itself in the marketplace and align itself with its customers’ needs. Reorganization Documents could also be used by a competitor to reorganize and implement those strategies that have proven successful for FedEx

without having to incur the costs/risks associated with creating and implementing new strategies. See C.A. Muer Corp. v. Big River Fish Co., 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12639, *5 (E.D.Pa. Aug. 10, 1998)(“Commercial information such as…documents related to corporate structure have been protected by courts….”); Brittain v. Stroh Brewery Co., 136 F.R.D. 408, 415 (M.D.N.C. 1991)(Noting that “commercial information, which encompasses strategies, techniques, goals and plans, can be the lifeblood of a business” and that such “information may [] be particularly deserving of protection if the disclosing corporation is vulnerable to competitors.”). C. “Non-Party Personnel Documents” means documents included in the personnel and employment files, maintained in the regular course of FedEx’s business, of any employee or former employee who is not a party to this action. These documents include information relating to one or more of the following types of private information: (a) Social security numbers or other government-issued number by which a social security number is ascertainable;

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

Related

Dale Gehring v. Case Corporation
43 F.3d 340 (Seventh Circuit, 1995)
Brittain v. Stroh Brewery Co.
136 F.R.D. 408 (M.D. North Carolina, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Reed v. FedEx Freight, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-fedex-freight-inc-arwd-2025.