Loomer v. Maher, 5:24-cv-00625

Laura Loomer sued Bill Maher and others for defamation relating to statements Maher made on his HBO show "Real Time."
The parties are disputing whether deposition materials (videos and transcripts) can be publicly disseminated or should be confined to use for this litigation only.
Defendants filed motions to protect the confidentiality of Maher's deposition video and transcript, the deposition of HBO's 30(b)(6) representative Nina Rosenstein, and Loomer's own deposition, claiming Loomer seeks to use them for purposes unrelated to the case, such as publicity and fundraising.
Plaintiff opposed, arguing a right to publicly share the materials, framing it as a public access issue.
The district court is considering the motions under Eleventh Circuit precedent differentiating between "judicial records" and discovery material, with greater privacy protections for the latter.
The court granted the motions to restrict dissemination, ordered confidential treatment for select Maher materials, and clarified that these depositions may be used only for litigation purposes at this stage.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether deposition materials may be publicly disseminated	Loomer: Public's right of access extends to discovery	Maher: Only judicial records, not all discovery, are public	Access right does not attach; discovery use only
Whether to designate Maher deposition video as confidential	Loomer: No showing of harm, right to share	Maher: Video can be misused for publicity and out-of-context	Entire video marked confidential, use limited to litigation
Confidentiality of portions of Maher's transcript	Loomer: No justification for confidentiality	Maher: Private topics unrelated to litigation should be shielded	Specific private portions kept confidential
Use of Rosenstein and Loomer depositions	Loomer: No reason to restrict use	Maher: Should be used only for purposes of this lawsuit	Litigating purposes only

Chi. Trib. Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304 (11th Cir. 2001) (establishes distinction between judicial records and discovery materials regarding public access)
Callahan v. United Network for Organ Sharing, 17 F.4th 1356 (11th Cir. 2021) (clarifies that right of public access applies only to judicial records, not all discovery)
In re Alexander Grant & Co. Litigation, 820 F.2d 352 (11th Cir. 1987) (discovery is a private process and courts may restrict dissemination to protect privacy)
U.S. v. Anderson, 799 F.2d 1438 (11th Cir. 1986) (recognizes private nature of discovery and supports protective orders to maintain privacy)
Seattle Times Co. v. Rhinehart, 467 U.S. 20 (U.S. 1984) (discovery should be used only for trial preparation, not for public dissemination)