Pandemic Darlings The pandemic economy, in original documents
Home Source documents Order on Motion for Protective Order — Airboss Defense Group v. United States

Order on Motion for Protective Order — Airboss Defense Group v. United States

Summary

A one-page Order in Airboss Defense Group, LLC v. United States, No. 24-365 (Case 1:24-cv-00365-PSH), in the United States Court of Federal Claims, signed by Senior Judge Charles F. Lettow and filed March 13, 2024 as Document 14. The order grants plaintiff's March 7, 2024 motion (ECF No. 7) for entry of the court's standard protective order after plaintiff represented that a protective order is necessary to safeguard competition-sensitive or protectable information likely to be disclosed during the litigation and that plaintiff is likely to suffer serious competitive harm if it is not safeguarded.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Date
2024-03-13

Cite this document

“Order on Motion for Protective Order — Airboss Defense Group v. United States.” Original at ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov, dated 2024-03-13. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2024-03-13-plaintiff-v-united-states-e4d47a4b-1/, SHA-256 e4d47a4b18aa4d0ab6d209506c25ac4a9b5ad574cd2257fd254d05420d561165.

Full text

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
No. 24-365

 (Filed: March 13, 2024)

AIRBOSS DEFENSE GROUP, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

On March 7, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion requesting the entry of the court’s standard
protective order.  ECF No. 7.  Plaintiff represents that “the issuance of a Protective Order is
necessary to safeguard the confidentiality of competition-sensitive or otherwise protectable
information likely to be disclosed orally or in writing during the course of this litigation” and that
plaintiff “is likely to suffer serious competitive harm if such information is not adequately
safeguarded.”  Id. at 1.

For good cause shown, plaintiff’s motion for a protective order is GRANTED.  The court
will separately enter a protective order.

It is so ORDERED.

s/ Charles F. Lettow

Charles F. Lettow

Senior Judge

Case 1:24-cv-00365-PSH     Document 14     Filed 03/13/24     Page 1 of 1

File and source

File
gov.uscourts.uscfc.49493.14.0.pdf
Size
111,902 bytes
SHA-256
e4d47a4b18aa4d0ab6d209506c25ac4a9b5ad574cd2257fd254d05420d561165
Our copy
gov.uscourts.uscfc.49493.14.0.pdf
Original
PACER (login required)
Back to top