Navar v. Walsh Construction Company II, LLC

USDC SDNY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ELECTRONICALLY FILED enna cnne nnnnecnnnnecnnnnenn XK DOC #: DATE FILED:_01/21/2020_ ALLISON NAVAR, et al. : Plaintiffs, : : 18 Civ. 10476 (LGS) -against- : : ORDER WALSH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY II, : LLC, et al., : Defendants. : LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: WHEREAS, by letter to Chambers dated January 17, 2020, Defendants request that Plaintiffs file a redacted version of the Memorandum of Law and selected exhibits in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class/Collective Certification. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ redaction requests are GRANTED. By January 23, 2020, Plaintiffs shall file the Motion for Class/Collective Certification and supporting documents, in redacted form on ECF and in unredacted form under seal, consistent with Defendants’ proposed redactions. Although “[t]he common law right of public access to judicial documents is firmly rooted in our nation’s history,” this right is not absolute, and courts “must balance competing considerations against” the presumption of access. Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Nixon v. Warner Commce’ns., Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 599 (1978) (‘[T]he decision as to access is one best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, a discretion to be exercised in light of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case.”). Filing the above-referenced documents in redacted form is necessary to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of confidential business information, including information related to the compensation of non-parties. The parties are advised that the Court retains discretion whether to afford confidential treatment to any information, redacted in the parties’ filings, in Orders and Opinions.

Dated: January 21, 2020 New York, New York oxen gt Kleweauran