# The City of Philadelphia v. Bank of America Corporation > District Court, S.D. New York · June 22, 2023 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10351992 ## Case - **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York - **Decided:** June 22, 2023 - **Opinion:** 100trialcourt - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10351992 ## Opinion text June 16, 2023 The motion to seal is granted temporarily. The Court will Via ECF assess whether to keep the materials at issue sealed or redacted when deciding the underlying motions. The Clerk of Honorable Jesse Furman Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 440. ORDERED. United States District Judge Southern District of New York AO Centre Street, Room 2202 New York, New York 10007 June 22, 2023 Re: City of Philadelphia, et al. v. Bank of Am. Corp., et al., 19-cv-1608 (JMF) Dear Judge Furman: Pursuant to Rule 7 of the Court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, and the Stipulation and Order Regarding Redaction and Sealing Process for Class Certification Briefing (Dkt. No. 358), Defendants, on behalf of all parties, hereby seek leave to file by ECF, Defendants’ Reply Memorandum of Law in Further Support of Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony and supporting documents (the “Daubert Reply Papers”) (Dkt. Nos. 424-425) with certain confidential documents and information redacted.! An index listing all material that the parties seek to file in redacted form is attached as Exhibit 1. The parties have met and conferred regarding each’s proposed redactions, and no party opposes the requests of any other party. The parties’ respective justifications for redacting those materials under Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110, 119-20 (2d Cir. 2006), and its progeny, are set forth below. While the parties acknowledge that the materials to be redacted are judicial documents to which the presumption of public access attaches, they believe that in balancing the competing considerations against the presumption of access, the Court should grant the parties’ motion. Defendants’ information. Defendants have substantially narrowed the scope of their confidentiality designations with respect to Defendants’ discovery material previously designated as Confidential or Highly Confidential and filed, quoted from, or referenced in the Daubert Reply Papers. Defendants wish to keep confidential and have filed in redacted form the Hubbard Reply Report, which discusses specific and sensitive information related to Defendants’ inventory levels on specific CUSIPs. Filing this document in redacted form is consistent with the standards for sealing in the Second Circuit. Courts in the Second Circuit and the Southern District of New York have held that it is appropriate to seal commercially sensitive “business information that might harm a ' Defendants’ Reply Memorandum of Law in in Further Support of Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony (“Daubert Reply Brief”), along with the supporting Declaration of Brandon Gould (“Gould Declaration”) and exhibits, were filed on May 15, 2023, with restricted access. Dkt. Nos. 424- 425. The Reply Declaration of Glenn Hubbard (“Hubbard Reply Report”) was included as an exhibit to the Gould Declaration. Dkt. No. 425-1. litigant’s competitive standing.” New York v. Actavis, PLC, No. 14-CV-7473 (RWS), 2014 WL 5353774, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 21, 2014); see also City of Providence v. BATS Glob. Markets, Inc., No. 14-CV-2811 (JMF), 2022 WL 539438, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 23, 2022) (allowing for sealing of documents based on potential harm to competitive standing). In order to avoid creating a competitive disadvantage for a litigant, courts regularly allow the sealing of commercially sensitive information, including “trade secrets, confidential research and development information, marketing plans, revenue information, pricing information, and the like.” Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Keystone Foods Holdings, Ltd., No. 1:19-CV-010125 (ALC), 2020 WL 5819864, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2020). The document Defendants wish to keep confidential falls within the scope of confidential and sensitive commercial information that should be sealed. The Hubbard Reply Report includes information related to inventory levels on specific CUSIPs. See Dkt. No. 425-1 at p. 32. Disclosure of this information would allow competitors to evaluate Defendants’ specific risk limits and inventory systems, and to adjust their processes to compete against Defendants accordingly. Plaintiffs’ information. The materials Plaintiffs wish to keep confidential and have filed in redacted form are numerical figures from Professor Schwert’s expert reports cited in Defendants’ Daubert Reply Brief and the Hubbard Reply Report. Professor Schwert’s expert reports quantify the impact of Defendants’ alleged artificial inflation of VRDO rates, and calculate his initial estimate of class damages. Such financial figures are proper subjects of redaction. See Valelly v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140126, at *3-4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2022) (granting application to seal expert report that contained, inter alia, the “financial implications of [the defendant bank’s] rate decisions”). Consistent with the legal authority cited above, Plaintiffs request the sealing of only that sensitive material from the expert reports of Professor Schwert. * * * Accordingly, on behalf of the parties, Defendants respectfully request that the portions of Defendants’ Daubert Reply Brief and the Hubbard Reply Report, highlighted in green (as indexed in Exhibit 1 hereto) be permitted to be filed in redacted form. All such materials are being filed with this letter-motion in both redacted and highlighted form, in accordance with Rule 7.C.iii of the Court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases. Respectfully submitted, COVINGTON & BURLING LLP JONES DAY By: s/ Robert D. Wick By: Michael P. Conway* Andrew A. Ruffino Jayant W. Tambe The New York Times Building Laura Washington Sawyer 620 Eighth Avenue Céalagh P. Fitzpatrick New York, New York 10018 Meredith Christian Telephone: (212) 841-1000 250 Vesey Street aruffino@cov.com New York, NY 10281-1047 Telephone: (212) 326-3604 Robert D. Wick Fax: (212) 755-7306 Brandon Gould jtambe@jonesday.com 850 Tenth Street, N.W. lwsawyer@jonesday.com Washington, D.C. 20001 cfitzpatrick@jonesday.com Telephone: (202) 662-6000 rwick@cov.com Michael P. Conway 110 N. Upper Wacker Dr. Attorneys for Defendants JPMorgan Chase Chicago, IL 60606 Bank, N.A., and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC Telephone: (312) 269-4145 Fax: (312) 782-8585 mconway@jonesday.com Attorneys for Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wachovia Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Funds Management, LLC, and Wells Fargo Securities LLC WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, AND DORR LLP MEAGHER & FLOM LLP By: Noah Levine* By: Boris Bershteyn* Noah Levine Boris Bershteyn Chris Johnstone Lara Flath 7 World Trade Center Kamali P. Willett 250 Greenwich Street One Manhattan West New York, NY 10007 New York, NY 10001 Telephone: (212) 230-8800 Telephone: (212) 735-3000 noah.levine@wilmerhale.com Fax: (917) 777-3834 chris.johnstone@wilmerhale.com boris.bershteyn@skadden.com lara.flath@skadden.com Heather Nyong’o kamali.willett@skadden.com Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 650 California Street, Suite 2000 Gretchen Wolf San Francisco, CA 94108 155 North Wacker Drive Telephone: (650) 815-4140 Chicago, Illinois 60606 hnyongo@cgsh.com Telephone: (312) 407-0700 Fax: (312) 407-0411 Attorneys for Defendants Bank of America gretchen.wolf@skadden.com Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Attorneys for Defendants Barclays Bank PLC Incorporated (including as successor in and Barclays Capital Inc. interest to Banc of America Securities LLC) PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP GARRISON LLP By: Susanna M. Buergel* By: Robert Y. Sperling* Brad S. Karp Robert Y. Sperling Susanna M. Buergel Staci Yablon 1285 Avenue of the Americas William B. Michael New York, NY 10019-6064 1285 Avenue of the Americas Telephone: (212) 373-3553 New York, NY 10019-6064 Fax: (212) 492-0553 Telephone: (212) 373-3396 bkarp@paulweiss.com Fax: (212) 492-4018 sbuergel@paulweiss.com syablon@paulweiss.com rsperling@paulweiss.com Kenneth A. Gallo wmichael@paulweiss.com Jane B. O’Brien Lina Dagnew Paul D. Brachman 2001 K Street, NW 2001 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1047 Washington, DC 20006-1047 Telephone: (202) 223-7356 Telephone: (202) 223-7440 Fax: (202) 204-7356 Fax: (202) 379-4098 kgallo@paulweiss.com pbrachman@paulweiss.com jobrien@paulweiss.com ldagnew@paulweiss.com Attorneys for Defendant Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC Attorneys for Defendants Citigroup Inc., Citibank, N.A., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., and Citigroup Global Markets Limited O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP By: Sergei Zaslavsky* By: Adam S. Hakki* Andrew J. Frackman Adam S. Hakki Michael M. Klotz Grace J. Lee 7 Times Square 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10036 New York, NY 10022-6069 Telephone: (212) 326-2000 Telephone: (212) 848-4000 Facsimile: (212) 326-2061 Facsimile: (212) 848-7179 afrackman@omm.com adam.hakki@shearman.com mklotz@omm.com grace.lee@shearman.com Sergei Zaslavsky John F. Cove, Jr. Adam Walker 535 Mission Street, 25th Floor 1625 Eye St, NW San Francisco, CA 94105-2997 Washington, D.C. 20006 Telephone: (415) 616-1100 Telephone: (202) 383-5300 Facsimile: (415) 616-1199 Facsimile: (202) 383-5414 john.cove@shearman.com szaslavsky@omm.com awalker@omm.com Attorneys for Defendants Morgan Stanley, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC, Morgan Attorneys for Defendants The Royal Stanley & Co. LLC, Morgan Stanley Capital Bank of Canada and RBC Capital Markets, Group Inc. LLC * Signatures used with permission pursuant to S.D.N.Y. ECF Rule 8.5(b). cc: All counsel of record (via ECF) Exhibit 1 Document Request for Location of Requested Redactions or Redactions or to Redactions Sealing Seal in Full? Requested By Reply Memorandum Redactions Page 2 Plaintiffs of Law in Further Support of Page 3 Plaintiffs Defendants’ Motion Page 6 Plaintiffs to Exclude Expert Page 7 Plaintiffs Testimony (Dkt. 424) Exhibit 24 to the Redactions Page 10 Plaintiffs Declaration of Page 11 Plaintiffs Brandon Gould – Page 12 Plaintiffs Reply Declaration of Page 15 Plaintiffs Glenn Hubbard (Dkt. Page 16 Plaintiffs 425-1) Page 32 Defendants Page 32 Plaintiffs Page 34 Plaintiffs Page 37 Plaintiffs Page 38 Plaintiffs --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10351992. Public record. Not legal advice.