United States District Court, D. New Jersey
ORDER GRANTING MYLAN'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO
MICHAEL A. HAMMER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
MATTER having been brought before the Court upon the
Motion of Plaintiff Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
("Mylan"), pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5.3(c), to
permanently seal portions of the transcript of the
teleconference before Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer on
July 24, 2017 (Dkt. No. 256), which was filed under temporary
seal ("the Confidential Information"); and Mylan
having reported to the Court that Defendant Celgene
Corporation ("Celgene") does not oppose and instead
consents to entry of the within Order; and the Court having
considered the papers submitted in support of the within
Motion; and the Court having found that the standards of
Local Civil Rule 5.3(c)(2) have been met and support the
sealing of the Confidential Information as set forth below;
and for the reasons set forth in the record of the
proceedings, and for other and good cause having been shown;
Court adopts the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions
The Nature of the Materials or Proceedings at
Findings of Fact
Mylan seeks to permanently seal its Confidential Information.
Local Civil Rule 5.3(c) requires the moving party to show:
(a) the nature of the materials or proceedings at issue;
(b) the legitimate private or public interests which warrant
the relief sought;
(c) the clearly defined and serious injury that would result
if the relief sought is not granted; and
(d) why a less restrictive alternative to the relief sought
is not available.
Confidential Information that is the subject of this Motion
was designated as "CONFIDENTIAL, " "AEO,
" or "OAEO" pursuant to a Discovery
Confidentiality Order in place in this matter (Dkt. No. 164).
Conclusions of Law
Common law recognizes a public right of access to judicial
proceedings and records. Goldstein v. Forbes (In re
Cendant Corp.), 260 F.3d 183, 192 (3d Cir. 2001) (citing
Littlejohn v. BIC Corp., 851 F.2d 673, 677-78 (3d
Cir. 1988)). The party seeking to seal any part of a judicial
record bears the burden of demonstrating that "the
material is the kind of information that courts will
protect." Miller v. Indiana Hosp., 16 F.3d 549,
551 (3d Cir. 1994) (quoting Publicker Indus., Inc. v.
Cohen, 733 F.2d 1059, 1071 (3d Cir. 1984)).
Court has the power to seal where confidential information
may be disclosed to the public. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c)(1)(G)
allows the court to protect materials containing "trade
secret[s] or other confidential research, development, or
commercial information!, ]"upon motion by a party, to
prevent harm to a litigant's competitive standing in the
marketplace. See ...