American Water Heater Company v. The Taylor Winfield Corporation

MOTION for Leave to File Document Under Seal

E.D. Tenn.February 13, 2019

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NORTHEASTERN DIVISION AT GREENEVILLE AMERICAN WATER HEATER CO., and ) A.O. SMITH CORPORATION, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) vs. ) Case No. 2:16-cv-125 ) TAYLOR-WINFIELD ) TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ) ) Defendant, and Counterclaimant, ) ) vs. ) ) AMERICAN WATER HEATER CO., and ) A.O. SMITH CORPORATION ) ) Counterdefendants, ) MOTION TO FILE DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND UNDER SEAL The Defendant, hereinafter referred to as “Taylor-Winfield,” appearing through its undersigned legal counsel, hereby respectfully moves the Court for an order allowing a portion of this Defendant’s anticipated Motion for Leave to Amend its operative pleading in this civil action to be filed “under seal.” As grounds for this Motion, the Defendant would respectfully show the Court that the Defendant will shortly seek leave to amend its currently operative pleading in this civil action; that a part of the Defendant’s proposed new counterclaim will allege the unlawful disclosure and/or use, by the counterdefendants, of a “trade secret” owned and held by the Counterclaimant; and that a smaller part of those allegations will divulge the general components of that “trade secret,” potentially risking a waiver or loss of the “secret” status of that claimed “trade secret.” Pursuant to E.D.Tenn. LR 26.2(b), and the Court’s electronic Case 2:16-cv-00125-CLC-MCLC Document 77 Filed 02/13/19 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 523 2 filing procedures, the Defendant/Counterplaintiff will redact only that last portion of the proposed Counterclaim from the Defendant’s publicly filed Motion to Amend, and submit the complete, unredacted version of the proposed Counterclaim to the Court for review under this Motion. The publication of the components of the Defendant/Counterclaimant’s claimed “trade secret” may result in the loss of its protection as a “trade secret.” To be sure, there is a strong public interest in access to information contained in the Court record. The courts have long recognized, therefore, a "strong presumption in favor of openness" as to court records. Brown & Williamson, 710 F.2d at 1179. The burden of overcoming that [***7] presumption is borne by the party that seeks to seal them. In re Cendant Corp., 260 F.3d 183, 194 (3d Cir. 2001). The burden is a heavy one: "Only the most compelling reasons can justify non-disclosure of judicial records." In re Knoxville News-Sentinel Co., 723 F.2d 470, 476 (6th Cir. 1983). Moreover, the greater the public interest in the litigation's subject matter, [**11] the greater the showing necessary to overcome the presumption of access. See Brown & Williamson, 710 F.2d at 1179. For example, in class actions—where by definition "some members of the public are also parties to the [case]"—the standards for denying public access to the record "should be applied . . . with particular strictness." Cendant, 260 F.3d at 194. And even where a party can show a compelling reason why certain documents or portions thereof should be sealed, the seal itself must be narrowly tailored to serve that reason. See, e.g., Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior Court of California, Riverside Cnty., 464 U.S. 501, 509-11, 104 S. Ct. 819, 78 L. Ed. 2d 629 (1984). The proponent of sealing therefore must "analyze in detail, document by document, the propriety of secrecy, providing [*306] reasons and legal citations." Baxter, 297 F.3d at 548. Shane Grp., Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield, 825 F.3d 299, 305-306, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10264, *10-11, 2016 FED App. 0134P (6th Cir.), 6-7, 2016-1 Trade Cas. (CCH) P79,659, 94 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1866 Nevertheless, the courts have recognized classes of information, such as trade secrets, that typically may meet the high burden required to issue an order sealing an otherwise public filing. Taylor-Winfield Technologies, Inc.’s claimed “trade secret” meets this burden. Taylor-Winfield has narrowly tailored the information it asks to be sealed from public view in order to maintain the secrecy of its “trade secret.” In order to Case 2:16-cv-00125-CLC-MCLC Document 77 Filed 02/13/19 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 524 3 narrowly tailor the sealed filing and, to allow public access to as much information as possible while maintaining the secrecy of the trade secret, Taylor-Winfield Technologies, Inc. will file a narrowly redacted Motion to Amend, in which only the description of the components of the “trade secret” itself will be redacted, and will submit the entire, unredacted document to the Court, pursuant to the “under seal” protocols of the Court’s Electronic Filing System, for the Court’s review in the consideration of this motion, pursuant to Eastern District of Tennessee Local Rule 26.2B. WHEREFORE, the counterclaimant, Taylor-Winfield, prays this Court to authorize it to file its Motion for Leave to Amend under seal as set forth above. Respectfully submitted, ARNETT, DRAPER & HAGOOD, LLP By: Dan D. Rhea Dan D. Rhea, BPR No. 5927 Attorneys for Taylor-Winfield Technologies, Inc. ARNETT, DRAPER &HAGOOD, LLP P.O. BOX 300 KNOXVILLE, TN 37901- 0300 Phone: 865/546-7000 Facsimile: 865/546-0423 E-Mail: drhea@adhknox.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned, counsel for the Defendant and Counterclaimant, hereby certifies that on February 13, 2018, a copy of the foregoing Motion to File Defendant’s Motion to Amend Under Seal under seal was filed electronically. Notice of the filing will be sent by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system to all parties indicated on the electronic filing receipt. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s electronic filing system. By: Dan D. Rhea Dan D. Rhea, BPR No. 5927 Case 2:16-cv-00125-CLC-MCLC Document 77 Filed 02/13/19 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 525