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.

INV Accelerator, LLC v. Vested Interest Co.

United States District Court, S.D. New York

January 6, 2020

INV ACCELERATOR, LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
VESTED INTEREST CO. D/B/A GOLDBEAN, MX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and JANE BARRATT, Defendants.

          THE ESSES; A W GROUP, LLC Leo L. Esses Attorneys for Plaintiff INV Accelerator LLC

          MULLEN P.C. Wesley M. Mullen WM1212 Attorneys for Defendants Vested Interest Co. and Jane Barratt

          AARONSON RAPPAPORT FEINSTIN & DEUTSCH LLP Rober J. Cocala Olga Aleinik Attorneys for Defendant MX Technologies, Inc.

          STIPULATION AND PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER

         WHEREAS, the Parties having agreed to the following terms of confidentiality, and the Court having found that good cause exists for the issuance of an appropriately tailored confidentiality order pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is hereby

         ORDERED that the following restrictions and procedures shall apply to the information and documents exchanged by the parties in connection with the pre-trial phase of this action:

1. Counsel for any party may designate any document or information, in whole or in part, as confidential if counsel determines, in good faith, that such designation is necessary to protect the interests of the client in infonnation that is proprietary, a trade secret or otherwise sensitive non-public information ("Confidential Information"). Information and documents designated by a party as confidential will be stamped "CONFIDENTIAL" or otherwise designated as confidential in writing.
2. The Confidential Information disclosed will be held and used by the person receiving such information solely for use in connection with this action.
3. In the event a party challenges another party's designation of confidentiality, counsel shall make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute, and in the absence of a resolution, the challenging party may seek resolution by the Court. Nothing in this Protective Order constitutes an admission by any party that Confidential Information disclosed in this case is relevant or admissible. Each party reserves the right to object to the use or admissibility of the Confidential Information.
4. The parties should meet and confer if any party contends that production or disclosure requires a designation of "For Attorneys' or Experts' Eyes Only," and in such meet and confer should address both the reasons for the proposed designations and the limitations on further disclosure of such documents. All other documents designated as "CONFIDENTIAL" shall not be disclosed to any person, except:
a. The requesting party as necessary to ssists in this action and counsel, including k-house counsel;
b. Employees of such counsel assigned to and necessary to assist in this action;
c. Consultants or experts assisting in the prosecution or defense of this action, to the extent deemed necessary by counsel;
d. The Court (including the mediator, or other person having access to any / Confidential Information by'virtue of his or her position with the Court); and e. ...

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.