3:21-cv-00501•FS Medical Supplies, LLC v. TannerGAP, Inc. et al
Full text
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:21-cv-00501-RJC-WCM FS MEDICAL SUPPLIES, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER ) v. ) ) TANNERGAP, INC. and ) TANNER PHARMA UK LIMITED, ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________________ ) This matter is before the Court on a Request to Redact Portions of the May 16, 2023 Motions Hearing Transcript (the “Request,” Doc. 109) filed by TannerGAP, Inc. and Tanner Pharma UK Limited (the “Tanner Defendants”). Rule 5.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directs that, absent a court order, certain personal identifying information must be redacted in filings made with the Court. Similarly, this Court’s Administrative Procedures Governing Filing and Service by Electronic Means (the “Administrative Procedures”) provide that, following the filing of a transcript of a court proceeding, a party seeking the redaction of personal identifiers must submit a request to that effect, indicating where the personal identifiers appear in the transcript by page and line and how they are to be redacted. Only certain personal identifiers listed Case 3:21-cv-00501-MR-WCM Document 153 Filed 03/06/24 Page 1 of 2
2 by the Judicial Conference in its policy on the Electronic Availability of Transcripts may be redacted using such a redaction request. In the event a party wishes for other types of information to be redacted, that party should request such relief by way of a motion in the ordinary course under the Local Rules with appropriate supporting authorities. See Administrative Procedures (“If a party wants to redact other information, that party must move the Court for further redaction by separate motion served on all parties and the court reporter within the 21-day period.”) Here, the Tanner Defendants seek the redaction of information that is outside the scope of the personal identifiers referenced by the Administrative Procedures. However, the Request does not include a legal basis for such a request or show consultation with opposing counsel. Consequently, the Tanner Defendants’ Request to Redact Portions of the May 16, 2023 Motions Hearing Transcript (Doc. 109) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Tanner Defendants may renew their request for the transcript to be redacted, by way of an appropriate motion, filed within 14 days of this Order. If no such motion is filed, the subject transcript (Doc. 107) will be made electronically available to the public without redaction. It is so ordered. Signed: March 6, 2024 Case 3:21-cv-00501-MR-WCM Document 153 Filed 03/06/24 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.