Judge temporarily blocks gov’t from sharing documents following Amazon’s claim of leaks

Update:

• A federal judge in Washington temporarily blocked the government from sharing documents it obtained during investigations into Amazon’s workplace safety and its alleged misstatements to banks. 
• The government obtained the documents during a discovery period and from depositions of witnesses connected to the investigations. 
• U.S. Magistrate Judge Michelle L. Peterson ruled that temporarily blocking the government from sharing the documents will give Amazon time to brief the court on a motion the company filed for a protective order. 
• Amazon argued that federal prosecutors and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration improperly shared the “sensitive” information with Washington state prosecutors. 

Amazon data overview: 

• Who: Amazon.com Services filed a request for confidentiality related to more than 550 document demands and 32 deposition requests from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
• Why: The Amazon data in the documents includes confidential business information and personal information of employees, the company said.
• Where: The Amazon safety probes confidentiality request was filed in federal court in Washington

(Sept. 18, 2023)

Amazon.com has filed a request for confidentiality related to 550 document demands and 32 deposition requests from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The investigation is related to worker safety at Amazon facilities and alleged misstatements to banks, the request states.

Amazon sent more than half a million pages of documents with what it describes as sensitive business information.

“Recent actions by the federal government and its consultants have raised serious concerns about the safe handling of Amazon’s sensitive information and have created an unacceptable risk of prejudice to Amazon in pending litigation,” the Amazon data privacy request says. “SDNY has conceded that its consultants leaked to Amazon’s litigation opponents sensitive documents that Amazon produced in these investigations, and SDNY has claimed the unlimited ability to disseminate more.”

SDNY refused to keep documents confidential, Amazon request says

Amazon says it requested the documents remain confidential to SDNY but was told SDNY could share any of the documents with state workplace safety regulators, even those currently in litigation with Amazon.

SDNY would not disclose who it has shared the documents with and would not agree to any protective order against sharing the documents with other foreign, federal, state or local government authorities, Amazon said in its request.

Earlier this year, Amazon and a staffing company agreed to pay $7.2 million to settle litigation alleging they should have paid workers for time spent doing security screening procedures in Pennsylvania warehouses. 

Do you trust Amazon with your data? Let us know in the comments.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Amazon, EzriCare lawsuit claims woman had eye removed after using drops
• Amazon class action claims retailer charges customers for returns despite contrary policy
• Amazon, Tile class action alleges product helps stalkers track victims
• Bookstore opposes judge’s recommendation to toss Amazon bookselling collusion class action