throbber
Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 944 Filed 01/31/22 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 26194
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC. and
`R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY,
`
`Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants,
`
`v.
`
`ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC; PHILIP
`MORRIS USA INC.; and PHILIP MORRIS
`PRODUCTS S.A.,
`
`Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs.
`
`Case No. 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB
`
`(cid:3)
`
`ORDER GRANTING PM/ALTRIA’S MOTION TO SEAL
`
`This matter is before the Court on the motion (Dkt. 920) filed by Philip Morris Products
`
`S.A., Phillip Morris USA Inc., and Altria Client Services, LLC (collectively, “PM/Altria”) to(cid:3)
`
`seal un-redacted versions of PM/Altria’s Brief in Support of PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to
`
`Exclude Design-Around Testimony of Reynolds’s Expert, David Clissold and accompanying
`
`Exhibits 1-5, 9, and 10(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:39)(cid:78)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:12) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) and Local
`
`Civil Rule 5(C). Because the documents that PM/Altria seeks to seal contain confidential,
`
`proprietary, and competitively sensitive business, financial, and design information of the RAI
`
`Strategic Holdings, Inc., and R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (collectively, “Reynolds”),
`
`Reynolds filed a memorandum in support of PM/Altria’s sealing request. (cid:11)(cid:39)(cid:78)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:21)(cid:28)(cid:17)(cid:12)
`
`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 944 Filed 01/31/22 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 26195
`
`supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives.” Ashcraft v.
`
`Conoco, Inc., 218 F.3d 288, 302 (4th Cir. 2000) (internal citations omitted). Upon consideration
`
`of PM/Altria’s motion to seal 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. PM/Altria’s sealing motion was publicly docketed in accordance with
`
`Local Civil Rule 5. Reynolds has filed a memorandum in support of sealing. The “public has had
`
`ample opportunity to object” to PM/Altria’s motion and, since “the Court has received no
`
`objections,” the first requirement under Ashcraft, 218 F.3d at 302, has been satisfied. GTSI Corp.
`
`v. Wildflower Int’l, Inc., No. 1:09CV123(JCC), 2009 WL 1248114, at *9 (E.D. Va. Apr. 30,
`
`2009); United. States ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:10CV864(JCC/TCB), 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.
`
`PM/Altria seeks to seal and redact from the public record only information
`
`designated by the parties as confidential. PM/Altria has filed publicly a redacted version of its
`
`Brief in Support of PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude Design-Around Testimony of
`
`Reynolds’s Expert, David Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-5, 9, and 10 (Dkt. 918), in
`
`addition to a sealed version (Dkt. 922), and has redacted only those limited portions it seeks to
`
`seal. 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. 3:11CV272-
`
`REP-DWD, 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
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 944 Filed 01/31/22 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 26196
`
`legitimate interest in information that is confidential to PM/Altria and Reynolds. Id. (“[T]here is
`
`no legitimate public interest in disclosing the proprietary and confidential information of [the
`
`defendant] … and disclosure to the public could result in significant damage to the company.”).
`
`The information that PM/Altria seeks to seal includes confidential, proprietary, and
`
`competitively sensitive business information of PM/Altria, Reynolds, and/or third parties, each
`
`of which could face harm if such information were to be released publicly. Specifically, the
`
`sensitive information that PM/Altria move for leave to file under seal, and to redact from a
`
`publicly filed version, includes proprietary and commercially sensitive business, financial, and
`
`design information of PM/Altria, Reynolds, and/or third parties:
`
`(cid:120) PM/Altria’s Brief in Support of PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude Design-
`
`Around Testimony of Reynolds’s Expert, David Clissold;
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 1, which are excerpts from the confidential Expert Report of David B.
`
`Clissold, Esq. in Response to Amended and Supplemented Opening Report of
`
`Stacy Ehrlich;
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 2, which are excerpts from the confidential deposition transcript of David
`
`Clissold taken May 14, 2021;
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 3, which are excerpts from the confidential Report of Ryan Sullivan,
`
`Ph.D. (March 24, 2021);
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 4, which are excerpts from the confidential Opening Expert Report of
`
`Paul K. Meyer (February 24, 2021);
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 5, which are excerpts from the confidential deposition transcript of Ryan
`
`Sullivan, Ph.D. taken May 11, 2021;
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 944 Filed 01/31/22 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 26197
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 9, which are excerpts from the confidential Opening Expert Report of
`
`Stacy Ehrlich (February 24, 2021);
`
`(cid:120) Exhibit 10, which are excerpts from the confidential transcript of the Open/Closed
`
`Sessions from 337-TA-1199 (January 27, 2021).
`
`3.(cid:3)
`
`There is support for filing portions of PM/Altria’s Brief in Support of PM/Altria’s(cid:3)
`
`Daubert Motion to Exclude Design-Around Testimony of Reynolds’s Expert, David Clissold and
`
`accompanying Exhibits 1-5, 9, and 10 under seal, with publicly filed versions containing strictly
`
`limited redactions. PM/Altria’s Brief in Support of PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude
`
`Design-Around Testimony of Reynolds’s Expert, David Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-
`
`5, 9, and 10 contain materials that fall 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.
`
`1:08CV371-JCC, 2008 WL 4924711, at *1 (E.D. Va. Nov. 13, 2008); United States 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(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:39)(cid:78)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:12) is GRANTED, and PM/Altria is granted leave to file
`
`REDACTED versions of PM/Altria’s Brief in Support of PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to
`
`Exclude Design-Around Testimony of Reynolds’s Expert, David Clissold and accompanying
`
`Exhibits 1-5, 9, and 10(cid:3)(cid:11)(cid:39)(cid:78)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:20)(cid:27)(cid:12)(cid:17)(cid:3)
`
`And to file UNDER SEAL un-redacted versions of PM/Altria’s Brief in Support of PM/
`
`Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude Design-Around Testimony of Reynolds’s Expert, David
`
`Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-5, 9, and 10. (cid:11)(cid:39)(cid:78)(cid:87)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:28)(cid:21)(cid:21)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:3)
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 944 Filed 01/31/22 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 26198
`
`And it is FURTHER ORDERED that un-redacted versions of PM/Altria’s Brief in
`
`Support of PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude Design-Around Testimony of Reynolds’s
`
`Expert, David Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-5, 9, and 10 shall remain SEALED until
`
`further order of the Court.
`
`ENTERED this (cid:22)(cid:20)(cid:86)(cid:87) day of (cid:45)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:88)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:92), 2022.
`
`/s/
`__________________________________________
`THERESA CARROLL BUCHANAN
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`(cid:36)(cid:79)(cid:72)(cid:91)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:68)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:57)(cid:76)(cid:85)(cid:74)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:68)(cid:3)
`
`5
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket