`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 45 Filed 11/28/17 Page 1 of 2
`
`UNITED STATES DIS'I‘RIC'I‘ COURT
`
`DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`**
`
`**
`
`:
`
`:
`
`Civil Action No. ITI-cv-l l2?9-IT
`
`* O
`
`
`RDER
`
`November 28, 2017
`
`REALTIME DATA LLC dibr’a ISO,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ACRONIS, INC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`TALWANI, DJ.
`
`The parties" proposed Protective Order [#30-3] is adopted by the court, excepting that
`
`Paragraph 16 is stricken, and shall be replaced with the lbllowing paragraph:
`
`No Party shall file any DESIGNATED MATERIAL with the Court until the Court
`
`determines whether such material may be filed under seal or on the public docket. A Party
`
`seeking to file such material shall first notify the Party who designated the material, and the
`
`Party seeking to maintain the confidentiality of the material shall promptly file a Motion to
`
`Impound Designated Material in accordance with District of Massachusetts Local Rule 7.2 and
`
`ECF Administrative Procedures. The Motion to Impound shall reference this Order, describing
`
`the general nature and purpose for submitting the paper (i.c., exhibit to declaration in support of
`
`motion, etc.), and provide a factual demonstration of potential harm to support the request for
`
`leave to file the document under seal.I Reference to a document’s designation as DESIGNATED
`
`only the most
`' Because the public has a “presumptive” right of access tojudicial documents,
`compelling reasons canjustify non-disclosure ofj udicial records that come within the scope of
`the common-law right ol'acccss.’” United States v. Kravctz, 706 F.3d 47, 59 (lst Cir. 2013)
`(quoting In re Providence Journal C0,, 293 F.3d 1, 10 (lst Cir. 2002)). Accordingly, the burden
`
`C“
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 45 Filed 11/28/17 Page 2 of 2
`Case 1:17-cv-11279-IT Document 45 Filed 11/28/17 Page 2 of 2
`
`MATERIAL pursuant to the Protective Order, without more, will not suffice to Show a
`
`particularized need for impoundment. Ifa Party obtains leave to tile DESIGNATED
`
`MATERIAL under seal, the filing party shall be responsible for informing the Clerk of the Court
`
`that the filing should be sealed and for placing the legend “FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT
`
`TO PROTECTIVE ORDER” above the caption and conspicuously on each page of the filing.
`
`Exhibits to a filing shall conform to the labeling requirements set forth in this Order. Ifa pretrial
`
`pleading filed with the Court, or an exhibit thereto, discloses or relies on confidential documents,
`
`information, or material, such confidential portions shall be redacted to the extent necessary and
`
`the pleading or exhibit 1i led publicly with the Court.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`Date: November 28, 2017
`
`~
`
`Mf‘;
`
`_,_.—-'—_'-—-
`
`.cvévILL-LC
`
`II
`
`United States District Judge
`
`the common-law right of access.”’ United States v. Kravetz, 706 F.3d 47, 59 (lst Cir. 2013)
`(quoting In re Providence Journal Co., 293 F.3d 1, 10 (lst Cir. 2002)). Accordingly, the burden
`is on the party seeking to maintain a document’s confidentiality to demonstrate that impounding
`the document will not violate the public’s presumptive right of access, including “‘a particular
`factual demonstration of potential harm, not .
`.
`. conclusory statements” as to why a document
`should be sealed. _I_Ci_. at 60 (quoting Fed. Trade Comm’n v. Standard Fin. Mgmt. Cong, 830 F.2d
`404, 412 (lst Cir. 1987)); see also Anderson v. Crvovac, Inc., 805 F.2d 1, 3’ (lst Cir. 1986) (“A
`finding of good cause must be based on a particular factual demonstration of potential harm, not
`on conclusory statements." (citations omitted».
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
