Opinion
19 Civ. 3472 (VM)
12-06-2021
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, v. APR ENERGY PLC, Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff, APR ENERGY HOLDINGS LIMITED, POWER RENTAL OP CO AUSTTRALIA LLC, AND POWER RENTAL ASSET CO TWO LLC, Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Third-Party Defendant.
ORDER
VICTOR MARRERO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Consistent with the Court's Individual Rules, on December 3, 2021, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant General Electric Co. (“General Electric”) requested leave to file under seal an unredacted version of its reply memorandum of law in support of its objection to Magistrate Judge Fox's order denying General Electric's motion to compel production. (See Dkt. No. 202.) At the same time, General Electric filed redacted versions of its objection on the public docket. (See Dkt. No. 204.) General Electric requests that portions of its objection remain under seal because those portions refer to and disclose material from documents produced by Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff and Third-Party Plaintiffs and such documents were designated Confidential or Attorneys' Eyes Only pursuant to the Stipulation and Protective Order for the Production and Exchange of Confidential Information, (Dkt. No. 78).
Materials may remain under seal “if the sealing order is narrowly tailored to achieve that aim.” Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 124 (2d Cir. 2006). The Court finds good cause to grant the requests for sealing the redacted portions of General Electric's objection.
For the reasons stated above, it hereby
ORDERED that the letter motion to seal (Dkt. No. 202) is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.