Order — Stipulation for Entry of Order on Confidentiality and Related Confidentiality Agreement, 3M Company v. TAC2 Global LLC

Summary

An order of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, in 3M Company v. TAC2 Global LLC, Case No. 8:20-cv-1003-T-35CPT, entered May 22, 2020. The order considers the parties' Stipulation for Entry of Order on Confidentiality and Related Confidentiality Agreement (Dkt. 31). The Court finds good cause for a protective order based on the nature of the case, the COVID-19 pandemic and the involvement of proprietary and sensitive business information. It states that the stipulation does not preclude filing confidential material with the Clerk or at trial and does not shift the burden of proof on confidentiality, and it cautions that confidentiality designations may be subject to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g) sanctions. The Court approves the stipulation and orders the parties to abide by its terms.

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

Full text

                          UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                           MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
                                 TAMPA DIVISION

3M COMPANY,

       Plaintiff,

v.                                                        Case No: 8:20-cv-1003-T-35CPT

TAC2 GLOBAL LLC,

       Defendant.


                                          ORDER

       THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of the Parties’ Stipulation

for Entry of Order on Confidentiality and Related Confidentiality Agreement. (Dkt. 31)

       “A district court must articulate its reasons for granting a protective order sufficient

for appellate review.” In re Alexander Grant & Co. Litig., 820 F.2d 352, 355 (11th Cir.

1987); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 26(C), 29. Accordingly, this Court finds good cause to enter

a protective Order pursuant to the Parties’ stipulation based on the nature of this case,

the COVID-19 pandemic, and the involvement of proprietary interests as well as other

sensitive business information.

       However, nothing in the Parties’ stipulation shall preclude any party from filing any

confidential discovery material with the Clerk of the Court or at trial, as such restrictions

are within the province of the District Court. See Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S.

20, 36 (1984) (“The trial court is in the best position to weigh fairly the competing needs

and interests of parties affected by discovery.”). Furthermore, nothing in the confidentiality

stipulation shall shift the burden of proof as to the confidentiality of the documents or the

opposing party’s entitlement to them.
      Additionally, the Parties are advised that “[t]he designation of a document as

confidential [pursuant to the stipulated agreement] may be viewed as equivalent to a

motion for protective order and subject to the sanctions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g).” See

Cipollone v. Ligget Group, Inc., 785 F.2d 1108, 1122 n.17 (3d Cir. 1986) (citing Manual

for Complex Litigation Second, (MCL 2d) § 21.431 (1985)).

      Accordingly, subject to the foregoing, the Court APPROVES the Parties’

Stipulation for Entry of Order on Confidentiality and Related Confidentiality Agreement,

(Dkt. 31), and ORDERS that the Parties SHALL abide by the terms set forth therein.

      DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 22nd day of May, 2020.




Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Any pro se party




                                           2


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flmd.376843.32.0.pdf

Size

30,546 bytes

SHA-256

c830b079039c0cae9e12c27278c30e26f792ea60e5a5a911a2489277dcc698d4

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flmd.376843.32.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)