The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. NCR Corporation

S.D. New York

The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. NCR Corporation

DecidedJune 15, 2020

Docket1:19-cv-10156

StatusUnknown

This text of The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. NCR Corporation (The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. NCR Corporation) 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

The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. NCR Corporation, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP C A D W A L A D i R 200 Liberty Street, New York, NY 10281 Tel +1 212 504 6000 Fax +1 212 504 6666 www.cadwalader.com

June 12, 2020 VIA ECF The Honorable Lorna G. Schofield United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. vy. NCR Corporation, Case No. 1:19-cv- 10156 (LGS) Dear Judge Schofield: We write on behalf of The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. (“BCG”) in the above-referenced action to respectfully request approval to file a pre-motion letter containing confidential information in redacted form, pursuant to Rule I.D.3 of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Procedures for Civil Cases (“Individual Rules”). In accordance with Paragraph 2.3 of the Parties’ Stipulated Protective Order Governing Confidential Material (“Protective Order”), entered by the Court on March 2, 2020 (ECF Dkt. No.40), BCG has designated the provisionally redacted information “Confidential” because it may contain or reflect confidential, proprietary, commercially sensitive information, and/or private or confidential personal information. Consistent with Your Honor’s Individual Rules and the Protective Order, BCG respectfully requests that the Court grant it permission to file the pre-motion letter, with the proposed redactions highlighted, in redacted form. We thank the Court for its consideration of this request. Respectfully submitted, parties are advised that the mere existence of a confidentiality agreement covering judicial documents insufficient to overcome the First Amendment presumption of access.” Bowling v. Johnson & Johnson, No. Civ. 3982, 2019 WL 1760162, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 22, 2019). A motion to seal must provide particularized stifications specific to the information sought to be sealed. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006) ("[D]ocuments may be sealed if specific, on the record findings are made that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that

motion to seal at Dkt. No. 52 is preliminarily DENIED, but the Clerk of Court is directed to stay the pending future Court Order. By June 18, 2020, Plaintiff shall file any renewed motion to seal. June 15, 2020 Naw York Naw York A f..

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

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP C A D W A L A D i R 200 Liberty Street, New York, NY 10281 Tel +1 212 504 6000 Fax +1 212 504 6666 www.cadwalader.com

June 12, 2020 VIA ECF The Honorable Lorna G. Schofield United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. vy. NCR Corporation, Case No. 1:19-cv- 10156 (LGS) Dear Judge Schofield: We write on behalf of The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. (“BCG”) in the above-referenced action to respectfully request approval to file a pre-motion letter containing confidential information in redacted form, pursuant to Rule I.D.3 of Your Honor’s Individual Rules and Procedures for Civil Cases (“Individual Rules”). In accordance with Paragraph 2.3 of the Parties’ Stipulated Protective Order Governing Confidential Material (“Protective Order”), entered by the Court on March 2, 2020 (ECF Dkt. No.40), BCG has designated the provisionally redacted information “Confidential” because it may contain or reflect confidential, proprietary, commercially sensitive information, and/or private or confidential personal information. Consistent with Your Honor’s Individual Rules and the Protective Order, BCG respectfully requests that the Court grant it permission to file the pre-motion letter, with the proposed redactions highlighted, in redacted form. We thank the Court for its consideration of this request. Respectfully submitted, parties are advised that the mere existence of a confidentiality agreement covering judicial documents insufficient to overcome the First Amendment presumption of access.” Bowling v. Johnson & Johnson, No. Civ. 3982, 2019 WL 1760162, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 22, 2019). A motion to seal must provide particularized stifications specific to the information sought to be sealed. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006) ("[D]ocuments may be sealed if specific, on the record findings are made that closure is essential to preserve higher values and is narrowly tailored to serve that

motion to seal at Dkt. No. 52 is preliminarily DENIED, but the Clerk of Court is directed to stay the pending future Court Order. By June 18, 2020, Plaintiff shall file any renewed motion to seal. June 15, 2020 Naw York Naw York A f..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

The Boston Consulting Group, Inc. v. NCR Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-boston-consulting-group-inc-v-ncr-corporation-nysd-2020.