Thereafter, on March 31, 2021, the Court ordered Celgene to supplement its motion to seal to provide additional authority and information in support (Dkt. No. 252).

On April 1, 2021, Mylan moved to seal its reply in support of its motion for leave to amend, and the Court ordered it to provide additional authority and information to support its request to seal this filing (Dkt. Nos. 254, 256).

Finally, on April 15, 2021, Celgene moved for leave to file under seal its reply in support of its objections (Dkt. No. 264).

Throughout these motions, the parties have asserted that the filings to be sealed discuss information deemed confidential or labeled “Highly Confidential” pursuant to the Protective Order entered in this case.

Thus, because the public’s right of does not extend to documents submitted in connection with a discovery proceeding, Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1312 (11th Cir. 2001); accord Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., 805 F.2d 1, 10 (1st Cir. 1986), or disclosure of the contents of an Abbreviated New Drug Application, AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharm. Inc., No. 18-cv-00193-IMK (N.D. W. Va. Jan. 31, 2019), ECF No. 27, the Court GRANTS both Celgene’s motions to seal (Dkt. Nos. 249, 257, 264) and also Mylan’s motions to seal (Dkt. Nos. 254, 259), and DIRECTS the Clerk to file the exhibits attached to these motions under seal.

On March 24, 2021, Defendants Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Mylan Inc., and Mylan N.V. (“Defendants”) moved this Court for an extension of time to file their response to Celgene’s Motion to Extend Certain Scheduling Order Deadlines (ECF No. 229).

Celgene did not object to the requested extension.

For good cause shown, the Court ORDERS that Defendants’ response to Celgene’s Motion to Extend Certain Scheduling Order Deadlines is due on or before April 1, 2021 and Celgene’s reply in support of its Motion is due on or before April 8, 2021.

No other deadlines are changed or affected by this Order.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record.

MYLAN INC., and MYLAN N.V., Defendants.

Pending is PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE UNDER SEAL

SANCTIONS, AND EXHIBITS.

For good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the motion and directs that the Clerk of this Court file Plaintiff’s instant Reply in Further Support of Motion for Spoliation Sanctions, and attendant exhibits, under seal.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented parties.

Civ.

P. 7.02(c), the Court REFERS this action to the Honorable Robert W. Trumble, United States Magistrate Judge, who is hereby designated and authorized to consider the record and rule on the pending motion to compel (Dkt. No. 134) and any discovery requests or subsequent non-dispositive pre-trial motions filed in the case including, without limitation, conducting a hearing on the motions, if necessary, and entering into the record an order as to the appropriate disposition of the motions.

The Court directs the Clerk to transmit copies to counsel of record and to the Honorable Robert W. Trumble, United States Magistrate Judge.

DATED: November 12, 2020.