Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 930-1 Filed 01/28/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 26137
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
`
`
`
`v.
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC. and
`R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants,
`
`
`
`ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC; PHILIP
`MORRIS USA INC.; and PHILIP MORRIS
`PRODUCTS S.A.
`
`Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-393
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING REYNOLDS’ MOTIONS TO SEAL
`
`This matter is before the Court on the motions filed by RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc., and
`
`R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (collectively, “Reynolds”) to file certain memorandums and
`
`accompanying exhibits under seal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) and Local
`
`Civil Rule 5(C). See Dkts. 823, 830, 840, 847, 854, 861, 868, 875, 882, and 890 (collectively
`
`“Sealing Motions”). Because the documents that Reynolds seeks to seal contain confidential,
`
`proprietary, and competitively sensitive business information of Altria Client Services LLC
`
`(“ACS”), Philip Morris USA Inc. (“PM USA”), and/or Philip Morris Products S.A. (“PMP”)
`
`(collectively, “PMI/Altria”) and/or third parties, PMI/Altria filed a memorandum in support of
`
`Reynolds’ Sealing Motions.
`
`Before this Court may seal documents, it must: “(1) provide public notice of the request
`
`to seal and allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, (2) consider less drastic
`
`alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) provide specific reasons and factual findings
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
`
`
`
`v.
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC. and
`R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants,
`
`
`
`ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC; PHILIP
`MORRIS USA INC.; and PHILIP MORRIS
`PRODUCTS S.A.
`
`Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-393
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING REYNOLDS’ MOTIONS TO SEAL
`
`This matter is before the Court on the motions filed by RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc., and
`
`R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (collectively, “Reynolds”) to file certain memorandums and
`
`accompanying exhibits under seal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) and Local
`
`Civil Rule 5(C). See Dkts. 823, 830, 840, 847, 854, 861, 868, 875, 882, and 890 (collectively
`
`“Sealing Motions”). Because the documents that Reynolds seeks to seal contain confidential,
`
`proprietary, and competitively sensitive business information of Altria Client Services LLC
`
`(“ACS”), Philip Morris USA Inc. (“PM USA”), and/or Philip Morris Products S.A. (“PMP”)
`
`(collectively, “PMI/Altria”) and/or third parties, PMI/Altria filed a memorandum in support of
`
`Reynolds’ Sealing Motions.
`
`Before this Court may seal documents, it must: “(1) provide public notice of the request
`
`to seal and allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object, (2) consider less drastic
`
`alternatives to sealing the documents, and (3) provide specific reasons and factual findings
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 930-1 Filed 01/28/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID# 26138
`
`supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives.” Ashcraft v.
`
`Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 282, 288 (4th Cir. 2000) (internal citations omitted). Upon consideration
`
`of Reynolds’ Sealing Motions and its memorandum in support thereof, the Court hereby FINDS
`
`as follows:
`
`1.
`
`The public has received notice of the request to seal and has had reasonable
`
`opportunity to object. Reynolds’ Sealing Motions were publicly docketed in accordance with
`
`Local Civil Rule 5. PMI/Altria filed a memorandum in support of sealing. The “public has had
`
`ample opportunity to object” to Reynolds’ motions and, since “the Court has received no
`
`objections,” the first requirement under Ashcraft is met. GTSI Corp. v. Wildflower Int’l, Inc.,
`
`No. 09-cv-123, 2009 WL 1248114, at *9 (E.D. Va. Apr. 30, 2009); see also U.S. ex rel Carter v.
`
`Halliburton Co., No. 10-cv-864, 2011 WL 2077799, at *3 (E.D. Va. May 24, 2011) (“[T]he
`
`parties provided public notice of the request to seal that allowed interested parties a reasonable
`
`opportunity to object—nearly two weeks.”).
`
`2.
`
`Reynolds seeks to seal and redact from the public record only information
`
`designated by the parties as confidential. Reynolds filed publicly redacted versions of the
`
`following documents and exhibits, in addition to a sealed version, and redacted only those limited
`
`portions that Reynolds seeks to seal:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`Exhibit 1 accompanying Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motions in
`Limine Nos. 1-3;
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motions in Limine Nos. 4 and 5 and
`accompanying Exhibits 1 and 4;
`
`Exhibits 3-6 accompanying Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion
`in Limine No. 7;
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion in Limine No. 8 and
`accompanying Exhibits 1-6;
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 930-1 Filed 01/28/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID# 26139
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion in Limine No. 9 and
`accompanying Exhibits 1-5;
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion in Limine No. 10;
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion in Limine No. 11 and
`accompanying Exhibits 4-7;
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Exclude The Testimony of
`Stacy Ehrlich and accompanying Exhibits 1-3;
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Exclude Certain Expert
`Opinions of Joseph C. McAlexander and accompanying Exhibits 1-3; and
`
`Reynolds’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Exclude the Testimony of
`Paul K. Meyer and accompanying Exhibits 1-6, 8-10, and 13.1
`
`This selective and narrow protection of confidential material constitutes the least drastic method
`
`of shielding the information at issue. Adams v. Object Innovation, Inc., No. 11-cv-272, 2011 WL
`
`7042224, at *4 (E.D. Va. Dec. 5, 2011) (“[The] proposal to redact only the proprietary and
`
`confidential information, rather than seal the entirety of his declaration, constitutes the least
`
`drastic method of shielding the information at issue.”). The public has no legitimate interest in
`
`information that is confidential to Reynolds and PMI/Altria. Id. at *4. The information that
`
`Reynolds seeks to seal includes confidential, proprietary, and competitively sensitive business
`
`information of PMI/Altria and/or third parties, each of which could face harm if such information
`
`were to be released publicly. Specifically, the sensitive information that Reynolds moves for
`
`leave to file under seal, and to redact from a publicly filed version, includes materials from
`
`PMI/Altria and/or third parties, such as confidential business information falling under the scope
`
`of the protective order.
`
`
`1 These memorandum and exhibits are collectively referred to as “Memorandum” and “Exhibits,”
`respectively, throughout.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 930-1 Filed 01/28/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID# 26140
`
`3.
`
`There is support for filing portions of the Memorandums and accompanying
`
`Exhibits under seal, with a publicly filed version containing strictly limited redactions. These
`
`Memorandums and accompanying Exhibits contain material that falls within the scope of the
`
`stipulated protective order. Placing these materials under seal is proper because the public’s
`
`interest in access is outweighed by a party’s interest in “preserving confidentiality” of the limited
`
`amount of confidential information that is “normally unavailable to the public.” Flexible Benefits
`
`Council v. Feltman, No. 08-cv-00371, 2008 WL 4924711, at *1 (E.D. Va. Nov. 13, 2008); U.S.
`
`ex rel. Carter, 2011 WL 2077799, at *3.
`
`Therefore, based on the findings above, for good cause shown, it is hereby
`
`ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED, and Reynolds is granted leave to file a
`
`REDACTED version of the Memorandum and accompanying Exhibits;
`
`And to file UNDER SEAL an unredacted version of Memorandum and accompanying
`
`Exhibits;
`
`And FURTHER ORDERED that the unredacted version of the Memorandum and
`
`accompanying Exhibits shall remain SEALED until further order of the Court:
`
`
`
`
`
`ENTERED this ____ day of __________, 2022.
`
`Alexandria, Virginia
`
`
`
`__________________________________
`
`4
`
`
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
