Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Moore v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division

June 2, 2015

OTIS MOORE and DOROTHY R. MOORE, Plaintiffs,
v.
WRIGHT MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY, INC. Defendant.

ORDER

BRIAN K. EPPS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

After several rounds of briefing, Defendant has narrowed the information it asserts should remain confidential to a single document, the expert report of Dr. Mari Truman. (See doc. no. 89.) Upon review, the Court finds Defendant has demonstrated good cause for the proposed redactions to Dr. Truman's report because those redactions contain highly sensitive information that would create a competitive disadvantage for Defendant if made public, (kL at 8-9). See Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bndgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1313-1314 (11th Cir. 2001); Loc. R. 79.7. Accordingly, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendant's motion for leave to file supplemental briefing, (doc. no. 83), and GRANTS IN PART Plaintiffs' motion to seal, (doc. no. 66). Thus, the Court DIRECTS the CLERK, pursuant to Local Rule 79.7(c), to return all documents Plaintiffs sought to have filed under seal that have been maintained in a secure file pursuant to this Court's April 17, 2015 Order. Plaintiffs shall refile, within seven days of this Order, the following documents and exhibits, with only the redactions to Dr. Truman's report approved above: (1) Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Defendant Wright Medical Technology Inc.'s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony of Dr. Mari Truman; (2) Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Defendant Wright Medical Technology Inc.'s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony of Dr. Sonny Bal; (3) Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Defendant Wright Medical Technology Inc.'s Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony of Dr. Reed Ayers; (4) Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant Wright Medical Technology Inc.'s Statement of Material Facts; and (5) Plaintiffs' Response in Opposition to Defendant Wright Medical Technology Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment.

SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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