Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Lexeo Therapeutics, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedMay 22, 2024
Docket1:23-cv-09000
StatusUnknown

This text of Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Lexeo Therapeutics, Inc. (Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Lexeo Therapeutics, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Lexeo Therapeutics, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

) Civil Action No. 23-9000 (PKC) ROCKET PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) LEXEO THERAPEUTICS, INC., ) KENNETH LAW, and ) SONIA GUTIÉRREZ, ) ) Defendants. ) )

X[PXRXOXPXOXSXEXDX] STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER 1. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 1.1 As the parties have represented that discovery in this action is likely to involve production of confidential, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted, this Court enters the following Protective Order (the “Order”). This Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery. The protection it affords from public disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential treatment under the applicable legal principles. Further, as set forth in Section 12.4 below, this Order does not entitle the parties to file confidential information under seal; this District’s Local Rules and CM/ECF Procedures and any applicable order of this Court set forth the procedures that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a party seeks permission from the Court to file material under seal. 1.2 In light of the nature of the claims and allegations in this case and the parties’ representations that discovery in this case will involve the production of confidential records, and in order to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the parties are entitled to keep confidential, to ensure that the parties are permitted reasonable, necessary uses of such material in connection with this action, to address the parties’ handling of such material at the end

of the litigation, and to serve the ends of justice, a protective order for such information is justified in this matter. The parties shall not designate any information/documents as confidential without a good faith belief that such information/documents have been maintained in a confidential, non- public manner, and that there is good cause or a compelling reason why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 Action: the instant action: Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Lexeo Therapeutics, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-09000-PKC, pending in the United States District Court for the

Southern District of New York. 2.2 Challenging Party: a Party or Non-Party that challenges the designation of information or items under this Order. 2.3 “CONFIDENTIAL” Information or Items: information (regardless of how it is generated, stored or maintained) or tangible things that qualify for protection under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), or that concerns or contains a party’s non-public business operations, processes, or technical and development information, or an individual’s private personal information, the disclosure of which is likely to harm that party’s or person’s competitive position

or personal interest, or the disclosure of which would contravene an obligation of confidentiality imposed by contract or court order. 2.4 Counsel: Outside Counsel of Record and In-House Counsel (as well as their support staff).

2.5 Designating Party: a Party or Non-Party that designates information or items in Disclosure or Discovery Material as “CONFIDENTIAL,” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE COUNSEL EYES ONLY.” 2.6 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner in which it is generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, and tangible things), that are produced, disclosed, or generated in disclosures or in discovery in this Action. 2.7 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to

the litigation who (1) has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this Action, (2) is not a past or current employee of a Party, and (3) at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party. For purposes of this Order, an Expert includes their direct reports and support staff. 2.8 “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE COUNSEL EYES ONLY” Information or Items: highly sensitive information or items that are more sensitive or strategic than CONFIDENTIAL information, the disclosure of which is likely to significantly harm the Designating Party’s competitive position, business or personal interests, or the disclosure of which would contravene an obligation of confidentiality imposed by contract or court order. Examples

of “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE COUNSEL EYES ONLY” information or tangible things include, without limitation, trade secrets, non-public financial information, business and sales strategies, commercial information such as pricing, terms of payment, product bundling, product roadmaps, ongoing research and development materials, sensitive technical materials, personal financial information, private individual medical histories, and other information of a similarly sensitive nature. 2.9 In-House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a Party to this Action. In-

House Counsel does not include Outside Counsel of Record or any other outside counsel. 2.10 Non-Party: any natural person, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity not named as a Party to this Action. 2.11 Outside Counsel of Record: attorneys who are not employees of a Party to this Action but are retained to represent or advise a Party to this Action and have appeared in this Action on behalf of that party or are affiliated with a law firm which has appeared on behalf of that party.

2.12 Party: any party to this action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, and Outside Counsel of Record (and their support staffs). 2.13 Producing Party: a Party or Non-Party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this Action. 2.14 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying, videotaping, translating, preparing exhibits or demonstrations, and organizing, storing, or retrieving data in any form or medium) and their employees and subcontractors.

2.15 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL – OUTSIDE COUNSEL EYES ONLY.” 2.16 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party. 3. SCOPE The protections conferred by this Order cover not only Protected Material (as defined above) but also (1) any information copied or extracted from Protected Material; (2) all copies,

excerpts, summaries, or compilations of Protected Material; and (3) any deposition testimony, conversations, or presentations by Parties or their Counsel that might reveal Protected Material, other than during a court hearing or at trial. However, the protections conferred by this Order do not cover the following information: any information that is in the public domain at the time of disclosure to a Receiving Party or becomes part of the public domain after its disclosure to a Receiving Party as a result of publication not involving a violation of this Order, including becoming part of the public record through trial or otherwise. If a Receiving Party believes Protected Material is not protected by this Order pursuant to this Section, the Receiving Party must follow the procedures set forth in Section 6 regarding challenging confidentiality designations.

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

Related

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Lexeo Therapeutics, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rocket-pharmaceuticals-inc-v-lexeo-therapeutics-inc-nysd-2024.