1) tf |e & UL Oo a ts LF bt ty BNE AY OAT RUSSELL ERLCUIVLAIN Application to file under seal granted. Judicial approval of th & A S S infant compromise petition is reserved pending □□□□□□□□□□□ supplementing the pending petition. Plaintiffs shall supplem: the petition by filing an affidavit, by a person with personal knowledge, setting forth an itemization of attorneys’ time an services rendered, supported by copies of the retainer agreement, contemporaneous time records, and an explana as to the items constituting the expenses claimed, □□□□□□□□ documentary evidence. The supplement to the petition shou be prepared so as to enable the Court to determine □□□□□□□ proposed settlement, in particular the legal fees and expens July sought, is fair and reasonable and in the infant plaintiffs bes interest. See, e.g., Martegani v. Cirrus Design Corp., 687 F. VIA ECF & FIRST CLASS MAIL Supp. 2d 373 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). Hon. Philip M. Halpern The Hon. Charles L. Brieant, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse SO ORMERED. 300 Quarropas Street White Plains, New York 10601 Philip M. Halpern United States District Judge Re. = Bayer v. County of Dutchess, et al. 7:19-cv-03383 (PMH) Dated: White Plains, New York July 21, 2023 Dear Judge Halpern: The Russell Friedman Law Group, LLP represents Plaintiffs in connection with the above- referenced action. The present application is made with Defendants’ consent. Per the Court’s Order, Plaintiffs are to file their motion for the infant compromise by July 21, 2023. DE/30. I write to respectfully request leave to file the motion and its supporting papers under seal in accordance with Your Honor’s Individual Rules. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the anticipated filings. A copy of the instant application together with attached Exhibit is being provided to Defendants’ counsel via electronic mail. 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,

(2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Niven vo Warner Comme ns . fnc.,

(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.”). Courts have permitted the filing under seal of documents that include personal data, in order to prevent the unauthorized dissemination of such data and to protect an individual’s privacy interest in that data, or the privacy interests of third parties. See ildianz Glob. Invs, Gmbll vy, Bank of clin Corp., No. 18-CV-10364 (LGS),

, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2021); Cin of

400 GARDEN CITY PLAZA, SUITE 500, GARDEN CITY, NEW YORK 11530

1 July 20, 2023 | Page 2

Providence v. BATS Glob. Markets. Ine., No. 14-CV-2811 (IMF),

, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 23, 2022). Here, the reason for the present application is that the supporting papers to Plaintiffs’ motion contains personal identifiable information regarding the infant-plaintiff, financial account information and personal identifiable information regarding Plaintiffs Dana and Michael Bayer. Finally, Plaintiff Michael Bayer is employed as a New York State Police Officer. The supporting papers set forth Plaintiffs’ personal identifiable information which for safety and security purposes Plaintiffs would respectfully request not be publicly disclosed. Therefore, it is respectfully requested that Plaintiffs be permitted to file Plaintiffs’ motion for the infant compromise under seal. Thanking the Court for its time and consideration, I remain Respectfully, THE RUSSELL FRIEDMAN LAW GRoupP, LLP /S Pablo A. Fernandez Pablo A. Fernandez ce: Kimberly Hunt Lee, Esq. (Via E-Mail) Attorney for Defendants