Sujal Bharucha v. Siebert Williams Shank & Co., LLC

Bharucha · United States District Court for the Southern District of New York · December 4, 2025 · No. 1:24-cv-09367 (JAV)

Summary

This document is a stipulated protective order entered by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Sujal Bharucha v. Siebert Williams Shank & Co., LLC. It governs the designation, disclosure, use, filing, handling, and return or destruction of confidential discovery materials, and includes an attached non-disclosure agreement. The order was signed by the parties on November 21, 2025, and entered by the court on December 4, 2025.

Holdings

  1. Good cause existed to enter an appropriately tailored protective order governing confidential discovery material exchanged during the pretrial phase of the action.
  2. Confidentiality designations may be applied only to portions of discovery material whose disclosure is restricted by law or would harm business, commercial, financial, or personal interests, and the order does not provide blanket protection for all discovery disclosures.
  3. Recipients may use confidential discovery material solely to prosecute or defend the action and its appeals, and may disclose it only to the persons and under the conditions specified in the protective order.
  4. Designation of discovery material as confidential does not automatically entitle a party to file it under seal; sealing requires compliance with the court's filing procedures and a showing sufficient to satisfy applicable sealing standards.
  5. An inadvertent disclosure of information subject to attorney-client privilege or work-product protection does not constitute a waiver or forfeiture under the protective order, subject to the order's clawback and challenge procedures.
  6. The court retains jurisdiction to enforce the protective order and may punish willful violations as contempt.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether good cause existed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) to enter a protective order governing confidential discovery material.
  2. What procedures and restrictions should govern designation, disclosure, filing, use, inadvertent disclosure, and disposition of confidential discovery material.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (1)

  • Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 120 (2d Cir. 2006)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…