Angelic Potts, et al. v. 4Life Research LLC, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Kansas addresses the parties’ disputed provisions in a proposed protective order in the litigation involving Angelic Potts and 4Life Research LLC. The court rules on the scope of confidential information, treatment of third-party child-abuse victim identities, subpoena notifications, and clawback procedures, and orders the parties to resubmit a revised protective order.

Holdings

1. The protective order should protect 4Life's trade secrets and confidential information about affiliates and customers, but the proposed broader category of corporate and financial records was vague and overbroad.
2. The protective order may protect documents containing the names of third parties alleged to have been subject to child sexual abuse, but may not broadly protect allegations identifying alleged perpetrators or participants.
3. Trade secrets are only one category of potentially protected information, so the definition of confidential information should not be limited to trade secrets as defined by Kansas law; however, broad language concerning all nonpublic documents about 4Life's operations and documents reflecting internal-investigation methodology and allegations must be removed.
4. A party receiving a subpoena requesting confidential information must notify the designating party within three business days.
5. The clawback provision should require the receiving party to return inadvertently disclosed privileged information or documents within seven days and should not permit sequestration as an alternative.

Questions Presented

1. What categories of business records and third-party information should qualify as confidential information under the protective order?
2. Whether the proposed definitions of confidential information were sufficiently specific and narrowly tailored.
3. How quickly a party subpoenaed for confidential information must notify the designating party.
4. Whether the clawback provision should permit a receiving party to sequester inadvertently disclosed privileged documents rather than return them within seven days.

Disposition

other