Opinion
15 Civ. 211 (LGS)
06-11-2021
SYNTEL STERLING BEST SHORES MAURITIUS LIMITED, et al., Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants, v. THE TRIZETTO GROUP., et al., Defendants/Counterclaim-Plaintiffs.
ORDER
LORNA G SCHOFIELD United States District Judge
WHEREAS, by letter motion dated May 14, 2021, the parties requested permission to file certain exhibits filed in support of their motions in limine and post-trial briefing in redacted or sealed form (Dkt. 986).
WHEREAS the proposed redactions contain confidential source code and confidential cost, financial and third-party information. It is hereby
ORDERED that parties' proposed redactions are accepted for the reasons explained in the chart below. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation's history, ” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing considerations against” the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc'ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (“[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”).
a. Syntel's Requests
Relevant Filing
Docket Number
Ruling
Syntel's MIL 1
Dkt. Nos. 729-1, 729-3
GRANTED. The document includes information related to Syntel's clients and finances; the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect against competitive harm, which outweighs the presumption of access accorded to filings regarding MILs.
Syntel's MILs 5, 8
Dkt. Nos. 735-13, 738-13
GRANTED. This document consists of an excerpt of source code, which if unsealed would result in competitive harm. That harm outweighs the presumption of access accorded to filings regarding MILs.
Declaration of Adam Kaufmann in Opposition to Syntel's Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, a New Trial or Remittitur
Dkt. No. 964-7, 964-8
GRANTED. The document includes information related to Syntel's clients and finances; the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect against competitive harm to Syntel and its clients, which outweighs the presumption of access accorded to post-trial filings.
b. TriZetto's Request Relevant Filing Docket Number Ruling
Syntel's MIL 1
GRANTED. The document includes information related to TriZetto's and Cognizant's finances, costs and business relationships; the proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to protect against competitive harm to TriZetto and its customers, which outweighs the presumption of access accorded to filings regarding MILs. Dkt. No. 729-1
It is further
ORDERED that the parties shall file the documents in redacted form on the public docket by June 25, 2021.