From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fischell v. Cordis Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Jun 7, 2017
Civil Action No. 16-928 (PGS) (LHG) (D.N.J. Jun. 7, 2017)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 16-928 (PGS) (LHG)

06-07-2017

TIM A. FISCHELL, ROBERT E. FISCHELL, AND DAVID R. FISCHELL, Plaintiffs, v. CORDIS CORPORATION, Defendant, and ABBOTT LABORATORIES AND ABBOTT CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS INC., Intervenors.


ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REDACT AND SEAL TRANSCRIPT, WITH FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

THIS MATTER having been brought before the Court by way of the Consolidated Motion To Redact and Seal Transcript filed by intervenors Abbott Laboratories and Abbott Cardiovascular Systems Inc. (collectively "Abbott"); and the Court having considered the submissions of the parties in connection with the motion, as well as the proposed redactions to the transcript to be sealed; and the Court having considered the factors contained in L. Civ. R. 5.3(c)(3), and good cause having been shown,

The Court hereby makes the following Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Consolidated Motion to Redact and Seal Transcript addresses the transcript of the hearing conducted on January 17, 2017, by the Honorable Peter G. Sheridan, U.S.D.J., on Abbott's Motion to Intervene (filed under temporary seal at ECF No. 92). Defendant Cordis Corporation ("Cordis") does not object and joins in Abbott's motion. Plaintiffs Tim A. Fischell, Robert E. Fischell and David R. Fischell take no position with respect to the motion.

2. The Court finds that the transcript of the hearing conducted on January 17, 2017, includes a number of references to confidential communications between Cordis and Abbott relating to a license agreement between Cordis, Guidant Corporation and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (a license later acquired by Abbott).

3. The Court finds that Cordis and Abbott have a legitimate interest in protecting the confidentiality of this information.

4. The Court finds that public disclosure of this confidential information could seriously injure and irreparably harm Cordis and Abbott because, among other considerations, it could provide the public insight into Cordis and Abbott's confidential business dealings and negotiations and may give competitors an unfair advantage.

5. The Court finds that the public and private interests in not having the information contained in the parts of the transcript that are the subject of the motion made generally available to the public outweighs any conflicting public interest in disclosure.

6. The Court finds that redacting the confidential information from the transcript in the manner set forth in the redacted version of that document submitted to the Court for review, filing the redacted version of the transcript on the Court's docket, and maintaining the unredacted version of the transcript under seal is for that document the least restrictive way of balancing the parties' privacy interests with the public's interest in disclosure of court proceedings.

7. Accordingly, the Court concludes that good cause exists, pursuant to the considerations set forth in Local Civil Rule 5.3(c)(3), to seal the unredacted version of the transcript of the hearing conducted on January 17, 2017, on Abbott's Motion to Intervene (ECF No. 92). The Court therefore permits the unredacted version of the transcript to be maintained under seal.

ORDER TO REDACT AND SEAL

THEREFORE, it is on this 7TH day of JUNE, 2017,

ORDERED that Abbott's Consolidated Motion [ECF # 95] to Redact and Seal Transcript of January 17, 2017 Hearing is GRANTED; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to seal the unredacted version of the transcript of the hearing conducted on January 17, 2017, on Abbott's Motion to Intervene (ECF No. 92); and it is further

ORDERED that Abbott shall submit to the court reporter a Statement of Redaction and Sealing pursuant to L. Civ. R. 5.3 along with a copy of the redacted transcript previously submitted to the undersigned for review; and it is further

ORDERED that, upon receipt of the Statement of Redaction and Sealing, the court reporter shall submit the redacted version of the transcript to the Clerk of the Court for filing on ECF.

/s/_________

HON. LOIS H. GOODMAN

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Fischell v. Cordis Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Jun 7, 2017
Civil Action No. 16-928 (PGS) (LHG) (D.N.J. Jun. 7, 2017)
Case details for

Fischell v. Cordis Corp.

Case Details

Full title:TIM A. FISCHELL, ROBERT E. FISCHELL, AND DAVID R. FISCHELL, Plaintiffs, v…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Date published: Jun 7, 2017

Citations

Civil Action No. 16-928 (PGS) (LHG) (D.N.J. Jun. 7, 2017)

Citing Cases

In re Lipitor Antitrust Litig.

See id.; Fischell v. Cordis Corp., Civ. No. 16-928 (PGS), [Dkt. 298] (D.N.J. June 7, 2017) (granting…