UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In re: GT Advanced Technologies, Inc.,
et al.
Debtors


)
)
)
)
)
)
)



Chapter 11
Case No. 14-11916-HJB
Jointly Administered


RESPONSE OF DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC. TO RELIEF
SOUGHT BY DEBTORS IN THEIR EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
ENTRY OF ORDER, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE
SECTION 107(B) AND BANKRUPTCY RULE 9018, AUTHORIZING
FILING UNDER SEAL OF UNREDACTED VERSIONS OF
SUPPLEMENTAL FIRST DAY DECLARATION AND OTHER
DOCUMENTS
Dow Jones & Company, Inc. (Dow Jones), publisher of The Wall Street
Journal, Dow Jones Newswires, and a variety of other news and information
publications, respectfully submits this response to the Debtors request (DN 92) to
file an unredacted version of the Supplemental First Day Declaration of Daniel W.
Squiller (the Supplemental Declaration) under seal, or in the alternative, to file the
full document in the public docket.
Preliminary Statement
1. Despite its title, the Debtors motion is best described as a motion for
permission to file an unredacted version of the Supplemental Declaration. Although
the Debtors do mention filing under seal, they do so only begrudgingly and present no
argument in favor of that outcome. To the contrary, they argue forcefully that the
materials addressed in the Supplemental Declaration do not meet the requirements of
11 U.S.C. 107(b)(1), and that in the interest of their creditors, equity holders, and
other stakeholders, as well as to ensure an open, transparent, and fair process in these
chapter 11 cases, unredacted versions of the Supplemental Declaration should
be filed. DN 92 at 5.
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 1 of 8

2
2. The United States Trustee agrees, stating that [s]hielding this
information from public view would be wholly inappropriate given the importance of
transparency to the bankruptcy process; the statutory right of the public to have
access to papers filed in a bankruptcy case; and the
inherent due process rights of all creditors and parties in interest to notice and
adequate disclosure. DN 111, 2.
3. Dow Jones joins the Debtors and the United States Trustee in urging
the Court to permit the Supplemental Declaration to be publicly filed and discussed
in open court. Dow Jones moves separately to underscore the importance of this
information to the public and the press, and to emphasize that in addition to the
statutory provisions of Section 107(b), there are also important Constitutional issues
at stake.
4. The Courts denial of public access to the full Supplemental
Declaration, other filings, and hearings in this case is only warranted where it has
determined itself that a party seeking secrecy has satisfied the proper legal standards
for sealing and the Court has explained its reasons with on the record findings that
such secrecy is required. Furthermore, to the extent the Court decides to deny full
public access, Dow Jones urges the Court that targeted redaction of limited
information is far more in keeping with the letter and spirit of Section 107(b)(1) than
wholesale removal of a document from the public record, and is the constitutionally
required narrowly-tailored, less restrictive alternative.
5. Finally, Dow Jones respectfully requests that the Court make any
transcripts and recordings of the closed hearings held on October 9, 2014 available to
the public and the press either in full, or with limited redactions where a party has
proved that an exception to the rights of public access is warranted.
Background Facts
6. In connection with the commencement of these cases, Debtors filed a
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 2 of 8

3
motion (DN 55) seeking permission to file under seal a second and more detailed
motion to seal a series of documents, including, principally, a Supplemental First Day
Declaration of Daniel W. Squiller. Debtors also requested that any hearing on the
motion, as well as consideration of the materials it submitted in support, be addressed
in camera. Id.
7. During an adjournment in the initial hearings on October 9, the
courtroom was cleared to address this motion. Only the United States Trustee and
counsel for Apple and the Debtors were permitted to participate. On information and
belief, this closed hearing continued for at least twenty-five minutes.
8. In an Order issued later in the day on Thursday the 9
th
, the Court
allowed the Supplemental Declaration to be filed under seal, absent further court
orders, but directed that the motion to seal itself (and several other motions
encompassed by the request) would not be maintained under seal. DN 86.
9. The Court also directed that Debtors could make this information
available to any party in interest, including to the public press, subject to the
proviso that any such information relat[ing] to the details of the Debtors business
relationship with Apple must be first disclosed to Apple, which would have three
days to file a request with the Court to prohibit such disclosure. DN 86.
10. The circumstances of Debtors financial struggles are of direct and
considerable interest to Dow Jones readership, and Dow Jones has covered the
matter closely. E.g., Daisuke Wakabayashi, Apple Sapphire Partner GT Advanced
Files for Bankruptcy Protection, The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 6, 2014), at
http://online.wsj.com/articles/gt-advanced-technologies-files-for-bankruptcy-
1412607074; Daisuke Wakabayashi, Joseph Checkler, Apple, Others Surprised by
Sapphire Partners Bankruptcy Filing, The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 8, 2014), at
http://online.wsj.com/articles/apple-surprised-by-partners-bankruptcy-filing-
1412782625; Joseph Checkler, GT Advanced to Close Arizona, Massachusetts
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 3 of 8

4
Sapphire Plants, The Wall Street Journal (Oct. 10, 2014), at
http://online.wsj.com/articles/gt-advanced-to-close-arizona-massachusetts-sapphire-
plants-1412960452. But Dow Jones cannot present an accurate and comprehensive
picture of these cases to the public in the absence of the Supplemental Declaration.
As the United States Trustee notes, the initial Squiller Declaration (DN 14)
provide[s] little insight to the conditions giving rise to the Debtors bankruptcy
filing. DN 111, 5. It is only in the Supplemental Declaration that the true nature of
the Debtors circumstances are disclosed.
11. More than the Supplemental Declaration is at stake. Dow Jones is
concerned that information submitted as the cases progress that touches in any way
on Apple, or falls within the expansive terms of the confidentiality agreement (DN
92-3), will be subject to seal, redaction, or other restrictive terms.
Argument

I. The Supplemental Declaration Does not Qualify for the Limited
Exceptions to the Right of Public Access Described in 11 U.S.C. 107(b).

12. 11 U.S.C. 107(b)(1) embodies and codifies the broad right of public
access, subject only to limited exceptions to all papers filed in a bankruptcy case.
In re Gitto Global Corp., 422 F.3d. 1, 7 (1
st
Cir. 2005). Only the first exception -- to
protect an entity with respect to a trade secret or confidential research,
development, or commercial information is implicated in this case. DN 92, n. 22.
And as Debtors correctly, note, it is narrowly construed. Id. 27.
13. Dow Jones has no first-hand knowledge of what the Supplemental
Declaration contains. But the Debtors and the United States Trustee clearly do, and
they agree that section 107(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code requires full disclosure of
the materials in the Supplemental Declaration. DN 92, 31. Dow Jones sees no
reason to doubt these assessments. No party has made any showing to satisfy the
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 4 of 8

5
burden of proving that information in the record is subject to an exception to the rule
mandating that bankruptcy court documents and hearings are public.

II. Preventing Public Access to the Supplemental Declaration Would Also
Run Afoul of Critical Constitutional Principles.
14. The Debtors and the United States Trustee both focus on Section
107(b)(1) and Rule 9018, which are the principle authorities governing public access
in this Court. Although common law access rights have been supplanted by section
107(b)(1) in bankruptcy cases see In re Gitto, 422 F.3d at 8 the First Amendment
right of access to civil proceedings very much applies. In re Alterra Healthcare Corp.,
353 B.R. 66, 73 (Bankr. D. Del. 2006) (internal citations omitted).
15. A First Amendment right of access applies if the place and process
have historically been open to the press and general public and public access plays
a significant positive role in the functioning of the particular process in question.
PressEnter. Co. v. Superior Court, 478 U.S. 1, 8 (1986). That is plainly true of
bankruptcy proceedings. Indeed, the First Amendment right of access is of special
importance in the bankruptcy arena, as unrestricted access to judicial records fosters
confidence among creditors regarding the fairness of the bankruptcy system. Gitto,
422 F.3d at 7.
16. [T] o limit the publics access to civil trials there must be a showing
that the denial serves an important governmental interest and that there is no less
restrictive way to serve that governmental interest. Publicker Indus., Inc. v. Cohen,
733 F.2d 1059, 1070 (3d Cir.1984) (citing Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, 457
U.S. 596, 60607(1982)).
17. For the reasons explained, Debtors have made no such showing in this
case. Where those seeking sealing and closing have failed to meet even the statutory
requirements, they have necessarily failed to show the kind of compelling interest that
would permit a restriction on public access under the First Amendment.
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 5 of 8

6
III. In the Alternative to Full Disclosure of the Supplemental Declaration,
the Least Restrictive Means of Balancing the Publics Right of Access
with the Limitations Described in Section 107(b)(1) is to Closely Redact
the Document Not to Seal it Entirely.
18. Debtors present the Court with a binary choice either permit public
access to the full, unredacted Supplemental Declaration or seal the entire document.
Dow Jones believes that the Court should choose the former option as the legal
standards for sealing have not been satisfied. But to the extent the Court finds that
certain limited information requires protection, Dow Jones believes that a third
option is required. Instead of sealing the entire document, the Court should redact
only those portions of the Supplement Declaration that satisfy the exacting standards
of Section 107(b)(1). A version of the document so redacted should then be released
for public access.
19. When protection is required under 107, the Court has discretion in
deciding how to protect commercial information as 107 does not mandate sealing
only protection. In re Anthracite Capital, Inc., 492 B.R. 162, 180 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
2013) (emphasis in original) (internal citations omitted). Not surprisingly, redacting
documents to remove only protectable information is preferable to wholesale sealing.
The policy favoring public access supports making public as much information as
possible while still preserving confidentiality of protectable information. In re
Borders Group, Inc., 462 B.R. 42, 47 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011) (citing Nixon v. Warner
Commcns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 59798 (1978)).
20. Redaction also satisfies the First Amendments preference for the
least restrictive means of serving the narrow interests of Section 107(b)(1). Dow
Jones respectfully requests that the Court consider this option if it determines that,
contrary even to the arguments of the Debtors and the United States Trustee, the
entire Supplemental Declaration cannot be released from seal.

Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 6 of 8

7
IV. The Court Should Also Release Any Transcripts and Recordings Made of
the Closed Hearing Held on October 9, 2014.
21. Dow Jones, together with everyone but the Debtors, Apple, and the
United States Trustee, were prevented from hearing the arguments made during the
closed hearing on October 9, 2014. To ensure transparency and to allow the public
the full breadth of its access to bankruptcy proceedings, Dow Jones respectfully asks
that any transcript and recording made of this hearing be released.
22. Because the public and the press (and creditors other than Apple)
were not free to attend, observe, and take notes of the October 9 hearing, we
respectfully request that the court order the release of recordings and a transcript of
what transpired. (Dow Jones notes, however, that a transcript is not an adequate
substitute for public access because some information, concerning demeanor, non-
verbal responses, and the like, is necessarily lost in the translation of a live proceeding
to a cold transcript. United States v. Antar, 38 F.3d 1348, 1360 n.13 (3d Cir. 1994).
But where the court determinates that concurrent access must be denied, the
provision of a transcript may well be the best available substitute. ABC, Inc. v.
Stewart, 360 F.3d 90, 100 (2d Cir. 2004).)
23. Here too, to the extent that certain statements made during the
hearing may be found by the Court to warrant secrecy within the limited scope of
Section 107(b)(1) and the First Amendment right of access, those statements can be
redacted.
Respectfully submitted,

Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
By Its Attorneys:
ORR & RENO, P.A.

Date: October 14, 2014 By: /s/ Jeffrey C. Spear
Jeffrey C. Spear, Bar No. 14938
Lisa Snow Wade. Bar No. 5595
P.O. Box 3550
Concord, NH 03302
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 7 of 8

8
603-223-9156
jcs@orr-reno.com
lsw@orr-reno.com


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing will be sent this day to all counsel of
record, and all others who have properly filed a notice of appearance and request for
documents, via the Courts Electronic Case Filing system.


/s/ Jeffrey C. Spear
Jeffrey C. Spear







1213371
Case: 14-11916-HJB Doc #: 119-1 Filed: 10/14/14 Desc: Exhibit Proposed Response to
Debtors Motions 55 and 92 to Seal Records Page 8 of 8