Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 953-1 Filed 02/11/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 26507
`
`IN THE 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
`
`[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING REYNOLDS’S MOTION TO SEAL DOCUMENTS
`IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO PM/ALTRIA’S DAUBERT MOTION TO
`EXCLUDE THE DESIGN-AROUND TESTIMONY OF DAVID CLISSOLD
`
`This matter is before the Court on the motion filed by RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. and
`
`R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (collectively, “Reynolds”) to file under seal Reynolds’s Opposition
`
`to PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude the Design-Around Testimony of David Clissold and
`
`accompanying Exhibits 1-4 and 6 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(d) and Local
`
`Civil Rule 5(C).
`
`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
`
`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
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 953-1 Filed 02/11/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID# 26508
`
`of Reynolds’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. Reynolds’s sealing motion was publicly docketed in accordance with Local
`
`Civil Rule 5. Altria Client Services LLC, Philip Morris USA Inc., and Philip Morris Products S.A.
`
`(collectively PM/Altria) have had an opportunity to respond. The “public has had ample
`
`opportunity to object” to Reynolds’s motion and, because “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. 1:09-cv-123 (JCC), 2009 WL 1248114, at *9 (E.D. Va. Apr. 30, 2009); U.S. ex rel.
`
`Carter v. Halliburton Co., No. 1:10-cv-864 (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.
`
`Reynolds seeks to seal and redact from the public record only information
`
`designated by the parties as confidential. Reynolds has filed publicly redacted versions of
`
`Reynolds’s Opposition to PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude the Design-Around Testimony
`
`of David Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-4 and 6, in addition to sealed versions, and have
`
`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. 3:11-cv-272-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 legitimate interest in information that is confidential to
`
`Reynolds or PM/Altria. The information that Reynolds seeks to seal includes confidential,
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 953-1 Filed 02/11/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID# 26509
`
`proprietary, and competitively sensitive business information of Reynolds and PM/Altria, 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 the public versions
`
`relates to and discusses confidential information of Reynolds, PM/Altria, and third parties, such as
`
`expert reports that include descriptions of confidential license agreement terms, internal business
`
`documents, and deposition testimony regarding confidential business information.
`
`3.
`
`There is support for filing Reynolds’s Opposition to PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion
`
`to Exclude the Design-Around Testimony of David Clissold and the identified accompanying
`
`exhibits under seal. Those filings 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. 1:08-cv-00371-JCC, 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
`
`REDACTED versions of Reynolds’s Opposition to PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude the
`
`Design-Around Testimony of David Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-4 and 6, and to file
`
`UNDER SEAL un-redacted versions of Reynolds’s Opposition to PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to
`
`Exclude the Design-Around Testimony of David Clissold and accompanying Exhibits 1-4 and 6.
`
`And FURTHER ORDERED that the un-redacted versions of Reynolds’s Opposition to
`
`PM/Altria’s Daubert Motion to Exclude the Design-Around Testimony of David Clissold and
`
`accompanying Exhibits 1-4 and 6 shall remain SEALED until further order of the Court.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:20-cv-00393-LO-TCB Document 953-1 Filed 02/11/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID# 26510
`
`
`
`
`
`ENTERED this _____ day of _________________, 2022.
`
`Alexandria, Virginia
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`__________________________________________
`
`THERESA CARROLL BUCHANAN
`
`UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
`
`
`4
`
`