`
`— Case 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 6919
`
`James E. Cecchi (icecchi@carellabyrne.com)
`Melissa E. Flax (mflax@carellabyrne.com)
`Michael Cross (mcross@carellabyrne.com)
`CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI,
`OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO
`5 Becker Farm Road
`
`Roseland, NJ 07068
`Telephone: (973) 994-1700
`Facsimile: (973) 994-1744
`
`Attorneysfor Defendants Lupin Limited,
`Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Lupin Inc.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
`
`
`
`JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and
`JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS IRELAND
`
`LIMITED,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`Civil Action No. 13-391 (ES)(JAD)
`(consolidated)
`
`ORDER TO SEAL
`
`AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS LLC,
`et al.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`THIS MATTER having been opened to
`
`the Court by Defendants Amneal
`
`Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Lupin Limited, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lupin Inc. and Watson
`
`Laboratories,
`
`Inc.
`
`(collectively,
`
`referred to herein as “Defendants”) and Plaintiffs Jazz
`
`Pharmaceuticals,
`
`Inc. and Jazz Pharmaceuticals Ireland Limited (collectively, “Jazz”) in the
`
`above-captioned matter, by way of the parties’ motion to seal information pursuant to Local
`
`Civil Rule 5.3(c); the Court hereby makes the following findings:
`
`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 6920
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 2 of 4 PagelD: 6920
`
`1.
`
`There exists in civil cases a common law public right of access to judicial
`
`proceedings and records.
`
`In re Cendant Corp, 260 F.3d 183, 192 (3d Cir. 2001) (citing
`
`Littlejohn v. BIC Corp., 851 F.2d 673, 677—78 (3d Cir. 1988)). Courts have recognized that the
`
`presumption of public access is not absolute and may be rebutted. Republic of Philippines v.
`
`Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 949 F.2d 653, 662 (3d Cir. 1991).
`
`2.
`
`The party seeking to seal any part of a judicial record bears the burden of
`6“
`
`demonstrating that
`
`the material is the kind of information that courts will protect.” Miller v.
`
`Ind. Hosp, 16 F.3d 549, 551 (3d Cir. 1994) (quoting Publicker Indus, Inc. v. Cohen, 733 F.2d
`
`1059, 1071 (3d Cir. 1984)).
`
`3.
`
`While the party seeking protection has the burden of demonstrating that it
`
`is
`
`entitled to protection, courts will find that “good cause” to protect information from exposure
`
`exists where disclosure would result in a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking to
`
`overcome the presumption of access. Pansy v. Borough ofStroudsburg, 23 F.3d 772, 787-91 (3d
`
`Cir. 1994).
`
`4.
`
`The analysis outlined by the Third Circuit has been codified in the District of New
`
`Jersey as Local Civil Rule 5.3. Local Civil Rule 5.3(c)(3) requires a showing of:
`
`(a) the nature
`
`of the materials of the proceedings at issue; (b) the legitimate private or public interest which
`
`warrants the relief sought; (c) the clearly defined and serious injury that would result if the relief
`
`sought
`
`is not granted; and (d) why a less restrictive alternative to the relief sought
`
`is not
`
`available. See L. Civ. R. 5.3(c)(3).
`
`A.
`
`Nature of the Materials at Issue
`
`5.
`
`Certain portions of Defendants’ Opening Markman Brief in Support of Their
`
`Proposed Claim Constructions dated November 4, 2016 (D.I. 321) and the entirety of Exhibits 4
`
`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 6921
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 3 of 4 PagelD: 6921
`
`and 5 to the Declaration of Natasha L. White in Support of Defendants’ Opening Markman Brief
`
`in Support of Their Proposed Claim Constructions (D.I. 321-1 and 321-2) (hereinafter, the
`
`“Confidential Materials”) contain information that is “HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL” to Jazz and
`
`subject to the Discovery Confidentiality Order entered on December 19, 2016 (D.I. 335).
`
`6.
`
`The Confidential Materials contain proprietary and confidential
`
`research,
`
`development, commercial, and technical
`
`information that has been designated as “HIGHLY
`
`CONFIDENTIAL-SUBJECT TO DISCOVERY CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER” by Jazz.
`
`7.
`
`Public disclosure of this information would provide the public insight into the
`
`business and operations of Jazz.
`
`8.
`
`The parties’ redactions are the least restrictive alternative because the redactions
`
`are narrowly tailored to include only the Confidential Materials which contain Jazz’s Highly
`
`Confidential information.
`
`9.
`
`Jazz has a legitimate interest, which warrants the sealing of this information, and
`
`a clearly defined injury if it is not sealed.
`
`B.
`
`Legitimate Private or Public Interests Which Warrant Relief Sought
`
`10.
`
`Courts may seal documents that encompass sensitive confidential and proprietary
`
`information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing.
`
`See Zenith Radio Corp. v.
`
`Matsushita Elec. Indus. C0., 529 F. Supp. 866, 890 (ED. Pa. 1981) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 26).
`
`The District of New Jersey has held that the inclusion of trade secrets and other confidential
`
`information in documents warrants the sealing of such documents. See In re Gabapentin, 312 F.
`
`Supp. 2d 653, 664 (D.N.J. 2004).
`
`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 6922
`
`Ca-se 2:13-cv-00391-ES-JAD Document 338 Filed 01/30/17 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 6922
`
`C.
`
`Clearly Defined Serious Injury if Relief Is Not Granted
`
`I 1.
`
`The District Court has discretion to balance the factors for and against access to
`
`court documents. See Pansy v. Borough ofStroudsburg, 23 F.3d 772, 781 (3d Cir. 1994). Here,
`
`Jazz’s interest in secrecy outweighs any need for public access.
`
`12.
`
`If relief is not granted, Jazz’s confidential
`
`information will be available to
`
`competitors, exposing Jazz to serious competitive and financial risks.
`
`D.
`
`A Less Restrictive Alternative Is Not Available
`
`13.
`
`The sealing of the Confidential Materials is an accepted practice in the District of
`
`New Jersey. See, e.g., Gabapentin, 312 F. Supp. 2d at 669.
`
`14.
`
`No less restrictive alternative is available to ensure that this information remains
`
`confidential because the parties’ request is narrowly tailored to seek the sealing of only the
`and 013103055 h“ PIIJ
`Confidential Materials which contain Jazz’s Highly Confidential informationJ
`(WM ya; has at” Hue Jan/«J;
`H5:
`‘
`WHEREAS,
`the Court, having determined that
`the Confidential Materialsq‘coiitsdi‘nlls'312/}15)‘
`
`confidential information, and the Court having considered the written submissions of counsel,
`
`and good cause having been shown,
`
`IT IS on thismday of § $9.
`
`2017,
`
`ORDERED that the parties’ Motion to Seal pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5.3(c)vis
`
`(gar/a. 337)
`
`GRANTED; and
`
`IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall permit the Confidential
`{ELF/Va. 3am
`Materialsvto ‘11 “MG“ §€Gled
`
`and the Clerk shall
`
`take such other steps as may be
`
`.
`
`reasonably required to maintain the confidentiality of the Confidential Materials.
`
`JOSEPgA. EiCKSON, U.S.M.J.
`
`