Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company

LHOMP S ON ATLANTA CINCINNATI COLUMBUS NEW YORK HIN E CHICAGO CLEVELAND DAYTON WASHINGTON, D.C. Dosa DOCUMENT June 29, 2021 ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC #: VIA ECF nena . ED:_ 7 0 Hon. Katharine H. Parker DATE FILED: 7/1/2021 United States Magistrate Judge Southern District of New York APPLICATION GRANTED Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse us □ Pearl Street hace tf f 2 le 4 New York, New York 10007 Hon. Katharine H. Parker, U.S.M.J.

Re: Spectrum Dynamics Medical Limited v. General Electric Company, et al., 7/1/2021 Case No.: 18-cv-11386 (VSB) Dear Judge Parker: On behalf of Defendant General Electric Company (“GE”), we write pursuant to Your Honor’s Individual Rule of Practice III(d), and the parties’ Stipulated Confidentiality and Protective Order (the “Protective Order”) (Dkt. 156) to request leave to file under seal GE’s Letter Motion in Opposition to Plaintiffs Claw-Back Challenge Letter (the “Motion”) and Exhibits thereto filed today.

The presumption of public access to judicial documents can be overcome if countervailing factors warrant confidentiality. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 598 (1978). Sealing of records may be justified to preserve “higher values,” mcluding the need to protect an entity from competitive injury. Lugosch, 435 F.3d at 124; see also Tropical Sails Corp. v. Yext, Inc., No. 14- cv-7582, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49029, at *10-11 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 12) (risk of “competitive injury is sufficiently serious to warrant protection” of proprietary business information). Consistent with this, courts routinely permit sealing and redaction of competitively sensitive proprietary business information or information subject to a claim of privilege. See, e.g., Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A.

Sunny Merch. Corp., 97 F. Supp. 3d 485, 511 (S.D.N.Y. 2015); Encyclopedia Brown Prods., Ltd. v. Home Box Office. Inc., 26 F. Supp. 2d 606, 614 (S.D.N.Y. 1998); see also Nixon, 435 U.S. at 598 (recognizing need to seal information that might “harm a litigant’s competitive standing”).

Here, the Motion and its exhibits discuss and reflect information that GE has designated Highly Confidential under the Protective Order and which is subject to GE’s ongoing assertion of the attorney client privilege.

GE respectfully requests that the Court permit filing of the Motion and Exhibits thereto under seal.

[email protected] Fax: 404.541.2905 Phone: 404.407.3680 THOMPSON HINE LLP Two Alliance Center www. IhompsonHine.com ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3560 Lenox Road, Suite 1600 Phone: 404.541.2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30326-4266 Fax: 404.541.2905 ‘THOMPSON HINE Page 2 Very truly yours, /s/ Marla R. Butler THOMPSON HINE LLP eee (pro hac vice) Jesse Jenike-Godshalk (pro hac vice) Lauren Hogan (pro hac vice) 312 Walnut Street, Suite 2000 Two Allionee Center Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 3560 Lenox Road NE, Suite 1600 Tel.: (513) 352-6700 . Fax: (513) 241-4771 Atlanta, Georgia 30326 .

Tel.: (404) 541-2900 [email protected] Fax: (404) 541-2905 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Brian Lanciault J effrey Metzcar Madison Avenue, 12th Floor Discovery Place New York. New York 10017 10050 Innovation Drive Tel.: (212) 344-5680 Miamisburg, Ohio 45342 [email protected] Fax (937) 430-3781 .

[email protected] Attorneys for Defendants General Electric Company, GE Healthcare, Inc., GE Medical Systems Israel Ltd., Jean- Paul Bouhnik, Sergio Steinfeld, Arie Escho, and Nathan Hermony and for Non- Party Yaron Hefetz cc: All Counsel of Record via ECF