Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Entertainment USA, Inc. v. Moorehead Communications, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Fort Wayne Division

June 9, 2015

ENTERTAINMENT USA, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
MOOREHEAD COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Defendant.

OPINION AND ORDER

RUDY LOZANO, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Motion Requesting Certain Confidential Documents Remain Under Seal filed by Plaintiff Entertainment USA, Inc., on April 17, 2015 (DE# 110). For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff's Motion Requesting Certain Confidential Documents Remain Under Seal (DE# 110) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The pleadings found at Docket Entry numbers 87, 88 and 96 shall remain under seal. Plaintiff is ORDERED to (1) prepare redacted versions of Docket Entry numbers 87, 88 and 96 based on the Court's directives below, and (2) file the redacted versions of these pleadings with the Clerk of the Court within thirty (30) days.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Entertainment USA, Inc. ("OWW") filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on August 18, 2014. In doing so, OWW filed under seal (1) its Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment ("SJ Memorandum") at Docket Entry 87, and (2) an Appendix in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment ("SJ Appendix") at Docket Entry 88. In response to Defendant Moorehead Communications Inc.'s ("Moorehead") Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, OWW filed under seal an Appendix in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment ("Opposition Appendix") at Docket Entry 96 on September 15, 2014. OWW filed a redacted version of this appendix at Docket Entry 98 on the same day. ( See DE# 111 at 9.)

In its March 20, 2015 Order on the parties' motions for summary judgment ("March 20 Order"), the Court noted that OWW had filed Docket Entry numbers 87, 88, and 96 under seal without moving for approval to do so. (DE# 106 at 44 n.11.) OWW was ordered to make a showing in accordance with Seventh Circuit law that these documents should remain sealed, or they would be placed in the public record. (Id. )

OWW now requests that a small subset of the information contained within Docket Entry numbers 87, 88, and 96 remain filed under seal:

• Within Docket Entry 87, the table found on pages 12-18 of the SJ Memorandum, and Exhibits F and G attached thereto (DE# 87 at 14-21, 52-54).
• Within Docket Entry 88:
• Paragraphs 7, 8, and 9 of the Affidavit of Chau Nguyen ("Chau Affidavit"), and its Attachment 2 (SJ App. Ex. A, DE# 88-1 at 2-5, 12-14);
• Pages 81-82 and 214-17 of the transcript of the deposition of Wade Alter ("Alter Deposition"), and deposition exhibits 2, 12, 13 and 15 (SJ App. Ex. M, DE# 88-2 at 9, 30-31, 34-35, 53-59); and
• Attachments 8, 9, 14-16, 26, 27, 31, and 32 to the Affidavit of Jason M. Kuchmay ("Kuchmay Affidavit") (SJ App. Ex. O, DE# 88-11, 88-12, 88-19 through 88-21, 88-31, 88-32).[1]
• Within Docket Entry 96, the table contained in OWW's Statement of Genuine Disputes (Opp. App. Ex. B, DE# 96-2 at 14-21).[2]

In response to OWW's motion, Moorehead identified two additional documents in Docket Entry 88 containing information that it asserts should remain filed under seal: Alter Deposition Exhibit 8 and Kuchmay Affidavit Attachment 30. ( See DE## 88-2 at 43-47, 88-45 through 88-48.) On May 13, 2015, the Court issued an order for Moorehead to show cause as to why certain documents and information it designated "confidential" should ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.