You're viewing Docket Item 44 from the case PSPC, Inc v. Sogeval Laboratories, Inc.. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 6:13-cv-00249-RBD-TBS Document 44 Filed 09/19/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID 270

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

ORLANDO DIVISION

PSPC, Inc,

Plaintiff,

v.

Sogeval Laboratories, Inc.,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

ORDER

Case No. 6:13-cv-249-Orl-37TBS

This trademark dispute comes before the Court on the parties’ Joint Redaction

Request (Doc. 43). By Court order, on August 28, 2013, the parties participated in a

settlement conference before a magistrate judge. (Doc. 35). The settlement

conference was intended to be a confidential proceeding. The only parts of the

conference that were not conducted off the record were the magistrate judge’s

introductory remarks and the memorialization of the terms of the settlement

negotiated by the parties. (Doc. 40). One of the terms upon which the parties agreed

was that their settlement would be confidential. Now, they seek to redact the terms of

their settlement agreement from the transcript of the settlement conference.

The parties have shown good cause to maintain the confidentiality of their

settlement agreement. The settlement conference was intended to be confidential. If

parties cannot rely on that confidentiality being maintained, then it would impair the

Court’s ability to conduct meaningful settlement conferences in the future and it would

harm these parties’ legitimate privacy interests. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED

Case 6:13-cv-00249-RBD-TBS Document 44 Filed 09/19/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID 271

and the court reporter is ORDERED to REDACT the following information from the

official transcript filed and docketed in the case:

Page

12

13

14

15

16

17

Lines

10-25

1-25

1-25

1-25

1-25

1-20



IT IS SO ORDERED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on September 19, 2013.

Copies to:

All Counsel
Official Court Reporter

-2-